After some months of battles, more or less peaceful, Milan taxi drivers have finally brought home the first victory against Uber.

Few days ago, the judge of the Specialized Section on the subject of enterprise, Mr. Marangoni, issued an ordinance following the petition filed by numerous cooperatives, or more generally companies, of Milan taxi drivers against Uber group’s companies.

Taxi drivers, before the beginning of Expo 2015, filed an urgent petition through which they asked the judicial inhibition of the Uber Pop service against Uber, by obscuring the website and its app, due to the fact that the activity is equal at all to the system of radio taxis which, as known, is subject to strict public rules.

Uber services, according to the reconstruction made by the defense of the applicants, constitute "unfair competition" pursuant to the Article no. 2598, par. 3 of the Italian Civil Code, which states that "... anyone who engages in acts of unfair competition: 3) directly or indirectly uses any other mean not comply with the principles of professional fairness and able to damage other people’s company," in so far as Uber drivers are able to offer the services at a lower price than the fees charged by taxi drivers, just because they not pay the costs (also huge) connected to the taxi service, first of all for the purchase of the license.

What we have just said is the requirement of fumus boni iuris required for the granting of precautionary measures; with regard to the periculum in mora, the applicant defence claimed that the activity engaged by Uber would lead to a significant loss of their profits and the diversion of customers, especially considering that Milan in this period is hosting the World Expo.

The defence of Uber has essentially focused on the qualification of the offered service, trying to make clear to the Judges that in this case it is not a transportation service by taxi, but a shared use of a private car, also in order to reduce pollution, between those enrolled in a community that is accessed by Uber Pop app.

The compensation, in accordance with the summary offers by the resistant, cannot be considered as a real consideration but, on the contrary, a mere reimbursement of travel expenses and costs of the vehicle.

Despite the imaginative but very convincing reconstruction of the service performed by the defendants, the judge confirmed that the issues raised during the proceedings can confirm that "the activity done by the defendant companies is actually and objectively interfering with the taxi service" and, moreover, in any way the service can be compared to the forms of car sharing and ride sharing as these imply that the driver "runs the way in its own interest and that the costs typically required to the participants are reduced to the division of petrol prices and road tolls".

According to these consideration, Mr. Marangoni, has accepted the existence of the unfair competition mentioned just now and, therefore, partially upheld the plaintiff's claim, inhibiting as a precautionary and urgent measure the use of the app Uber Pop (or app providing the same service), fixing a penalty of € 20,000 per day, from the fifteenth day of notification of the order, in case of delay in the implementation of the injunction and ordering the publication of the operative part of the same on the home page website Uber.

The reactions to the order have been varied: on the one hand, in fact, there are those who considers Italy not an avant-garde Country, as in all other countries Uber coexists peacefully with the ordinary taxi service, on the other side there is who defends the category of taxi drivers considering that the sacrifices that they have to do to buy the license and carry out regular profession vanish when other services like Uber become legitimate. At this point we just have to wait for the reaction of Uber that, pursuant to art. 669 terdecies Civil Procedure Code, is able to object the injunction.