Dr Eric Crampton: Über-messy

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that four Uber drivers have actually been Uber employees all along.

In the Court’s view, Uber had enough control over those drivers’ businesses that they couldn’t be considered contractors.

Roger Partridge: Analysing Uber - the critical point the Supreme Court failed to properly consider

The Supreme Court’s Uber judgment (Rasier Operations BV v E Tū Inc [2025] NZSC 162) has delivered clarity of a sort. The Court dismissed Uber’s appeal, upholding the finding that drivers are employees when logged into the Uber app.

The decision was unanimous on the outcome but divided on reasoning. The majority judgment of Winkelmann CJ , Williams and Miller JJ and the separate judgment by Glazebrook and Ellen France JJ disagreed on fundamental questions, including whether the Court of Appeal had erred in the role of subjective intention in the analysis.