Sommario: 

1. L’affaire Uber Pop. 

2. La vicenda processuale e le ordinanze del Tribunale di Milano. 

3. Le soluzioni adottate in altri Paesi. 

4. Concorrenza sleale per violazione di norme pubblicistiche: l’art. 2598 c.c. come fattore di
stimolo della concorrenza 

5. Il rapporto di concorrenza e la qualificazione dei servizi offerti da Uber come trasporto pubblico.

6. Il rinvio pregiudiziale del Juzgado Mercantil di Barcellona: trasporto non di linea o servizio della società dell’informazione?

7. Certezze e dubbi in Italia in attesa del legislatore. 

8. Alcune considerazioni conclusive.

Abstract:

The American company Uber provides road transport services through an app which puts into contact possible passengers and affiliated drivers. However, a specific service called Uber Pop has been forbidden by two sentences pronounced by the Tribunal of Milan, because of its key feature. Drivers have no regular license for passengers transport, as the Italian law requires, but they are simple citizens that make available their private cars for this service, indeed. This article, after reconstructing what happened during the trial, analyzes the case from two different perspectives. Firstly, it examines in depth Uber’s behavior, in order to verify if it is possible to speak about unfair competition under the Italian civil legislation. Consequently, Uber’s ordinary services are examined, so it will be possible to understand their real nature also in the light of the positions assumed by foreign and national institutions. Are these services classifiable as “public transport”, normally not regarded by the European liberalizations? Do they fit better in the “information society services” category? In the end, the article highlights the need for regulatory measures in the field of technological mobility services and tries to prospect some possible solutions.