London Cabbies’ £340m Claim Against Uber Thrown Out as Too Late, Reports Say

Uber has defeated a mass lawsuit from London cab drivers because it was brought too late, according to reports on Monday 19 October. For the thousands of drivers involved, the ruling appears to end their claim for losses they say they suffered competing with Uber.

It also matters beyond taxis. Large group claims, often backed by litigation funders, can stand or fall on timing alone, however serious the allegations.

What happened?

“Uber on Monday said it had won its bid to throw out two linked lawsuits valued at around £340 million ($453 million) brought by thousands of London black cab drivers and two former private hire companies,” Reuters reported. Reuters attributed the win to Uber and said “a copy of the High Court’s ruling was not immediately available”.

Legal news service Law360 reported that Uber defeated the claims “as a High Court judge ruled that they had waited too long to challenge the company’s allegedly unlawful operations”.

Until the judgment is published, that is all that is known about the court’s reasoning.

What were the drivers claiming?

The claimants alleged that Uber gave “misleading and inaccurate information” to Transport for London (TfL) when it obtained its private hire vehicle operator licence, Reuters reported. Uber denied the allegations.

An earlier High Court ruling from October 2025 sets out the case in more detail. The claim was framed as an “unlawful means conspiracy”. The allegation was that Uber “misrepresented the nature of its business operating model and, on that basis, the licence should not have been granted”.

The claimants said this let Uber compete with their lawful services and undercut their fares, so that Uber profited at their expense. The period under scrutiny ran from 2012 to 14 March 2018, “when changes were made to Uber’s mode of operation”.

Who brought the claims, and for how much?

There were two claims, according to the 2025 ruling:

• About 13,000 black cab drivers, whose total loss was “estimated at £199,395,000”, issued on 2 May 2024.
• The alleged assignee of the rights of two companies, Kabbee and Iride, said to have provided private hire services in London, with losses “estimated at £141,000,000”, issued on 24 June 2024.

Together that is “about £340 million”. But the ruling noted that it comprised “relatively modest claims by value in respect of each of the numerous claimants”. Spread across 13,000 drivers, the drivers’ share works out at roughly £15,000 each on average (TSN’s calculation from the court’s figures).

Why did timing matter so much?

Reuters reported that Uber “argued the lawsuits were filed after the six-year limitation period for bringing such a claim, meaning they should be thrown out”.

According to the 2025 ruling, Uber said the claims were time-barred either by 14 March 2018 or by 14 March 2024, six years after the changes to its licence. The claims were issued in May and June 2024.

The claimants relied on section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980, which can delay the start of the six years where there has been fraud or deliberate concealment. They argued that time did not start to run until a reasonable period after 25 or 26 June 2018, when a hearing before the Chief Magistrate found “irregularities concerning the operation of the licence by Uber” but still allowed Uber’s appeal over its licence renewal.

In the October 2025 ruling, the court agreed to decide limitation first. It said that if limitation were resolved in Uber’s favour, it “would be dispositive, potentially, of the whole case”. For that question only, the claimants’ allegations of misrepresentation were assumed to be true.

Who was behind the case?

The claimants were represented by the law firm Mishcon de Reya, according to the 2025 ruling. A note by barristers’ chambers One Essex Court says the litigation funder Harbour approached Mishcon about a possible claim in December 2017, and later agreed to fund the initial phases.

In June 2026, the court ordered disclosure of certain communications between Harbour, Mishcon, the Licensed Taxi Drivers’ Association and individual drivers, according to that note. Uber had argued they showed the claim could reasonably have been discovered before 25 and 26 June 2018.

What happens next?

The full judgment should explain why the court found the claims out of time. It is not yet available.

TSN has found no statement from the drivers, the Licensed Taxi Drivers’ Association, Mishcon de Reya or Harbour. We have also seen no report of an appeal or of who will pay the legal costs.

Our read

This is TSN’s analysis. On the reported facts, the case appears to have been decided on timing, not on whether Uber misled TfL. Those allegations, which Uber denies, have not been tested at trial. For funded group claims, the June 2026 disclosure fight is the warning: a funder’s own early investigation can become evidence of when claimants could have known.

Sources

• Reuters via CNA: Uber wins bid to throw out UK mass lawsuit by black cab drivers (19 October 2026)
• Law360: Uber Defeats £340M Claim From UK Cab Drivers (Joanne Faulkner, 19 October 2026)
• White & Ors v Uber London Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 2972 (Comm), ruling of 22 October 2025 (BAILII)
• The same ruling on the National Archives’ Find Case Law
• One Essex Court: White & Ors v Uber: Commercial Court rejects claim to litigation privilege over funders’ initial assessment of a claim

Related stories

• Uber, Verne and Pony.ai Begin Testing Robotaxis in Manchester
• Pony.ai and Uber Plan Robotaxi Testing in London: What Is Planned, and What Is Not Known