Professional Documents
Culture Documents
___________
_,
____
L-)
BETWEEN:
CITY OFTORONTO
Applicant
-
and
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
TO THE RESPONDENT
A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED by the Applicant. The claim
made by the Applicant appears on the following page.
day of
IF YOU WISH TO OPPOSE THIS APPLICATION, you or an Ontario lawyer acting for
you must forthwith prepare a notice of appearance in Form 38A prescribed by the Rules of Civil
Procedure, serve it on the Applicants lawyer or, where the Applicant does not have a lawyer,
serve it on the Applicant, and file it, with proof of service, in this court office, and you or your
lawyer must appear at the hearing.
IF YOU WISH TO PRESENT AFFIDAVIT OR OTHER DOCUMENTARY
EVIDENCE TO THE COURT OR TO EXAMINE OR CROSS-EXAMINE WITNESSES OF
THE APPLICATION, you or your lawyer must, in addition to serving your notice of appearance,
serve a copy of the evidence on the Applicants lawyer or, where the Applicant does not have a
lawyer, serve it on the Applicant, and file it, with proof of service, in the court office where the
application is to be heard as soon as possible, but not later than 2 p.m. at least four days before
the hearing.
AND TO:
UBER B.V.
Barbara Strozzilaan 101
1083 HN Amsterdam
The Netherlands
AND TO:
APPLICATION
1.
a declaration that the respondents, Uber Canada Inc., Uher B.V., and Rasier
Operations B.V. (together Uber), are operating a taxicab brokerage in the City
of Toronto contrary to City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 545, Licensing;
(b)
(c)
ii.
iii.
iv.
(d)
ii.
iii.
iv.
(e)
(f
2.
(g)
(h)
such further and other relief as counsel may advise and this Court may permit.
pursuant to the City of Toronto Act, S.O. 2006, Chapter 11, Schedule A, the City
has broad powers to pass by-laws governing business licensing in the City,
including the licensing of taxicabs and limousines;
(b)
the City has enacted a licensing regime requiring, among other things, that:
i.
ii.
taxicab brokers accepting requests in any manner for taxicabs used for hire
have City-issued licences; and
iii.
to operate in Toronto.
(c)
the Citys business licensing regime prohibits taxicab brokers and limousine
service companies from arranging transportation:
i.
ii.
(d)
in accordance with this authority to licence businesses and its authority to enact
by-laws for the purposes of consumer protection, the economic and environmental
well-being of the City, and the health, safety and well-being of people, the Citys
licensing regime requires that, among other things:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
the fares or rates charged for taxicab or limousine rides are in accordance
with a fee schedule established by the City.
(e)
(f
Uber is required to have, but has not applied for or received, a limousine service
company licence and a taxicab broker licence;
(g)
Uber operates in breach of the Citys licensing by-laws insofar as, among other
things, it operates as a taxicab brokerage and limousine service company by:
i.
ii.
iii.
assessment of local demand, and which is not consistent with the taxi fares
or minimum limousine rates established by the City;
Ubers Ongoing and Expanded Contravention of the Citys Licensing Requirements
(h)
Uber has received specific notice of and has flagrantly disregarded the Citys
licensing requirements since it commenced its business operations in Toronto;
(i)
j)
as of October, 2014, Uber has been charged with 36 by-law offences related to the
operation of a limousine service company or taxicab brokerage without a proper
municipal licence as a result of the services it offers under the labels UberTaxi,
UberBiack and UberSUV;
(k)
the by-law charges against Uber are still before the Ontario Court of Justice;
(1)
the City applies to restrain Ubers operations in the City because Uber has and is
continuing to flout business licensing requirements for taxicab brokerages and
limousine service companies as set out in the City of Toronto Municipal Code;
(m)
the City has elected to bring this Application to restrain Ubers business
operations rather than to continue to lay individual charges;
(n)
passengers with drivers that it knows do not have valid City licences permitting
them to drive a taxicab or limousine and taking payment for these rides;
(o)
Ubers business operations are not saved by the provisions of section 1(2), (3) or
(4) of the Public Vehicles Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.54, insofar as those provisions
only permit individuals to car pool and the transportation services that Uber
arranges do not satisfy the car pooi criteria;
(p)
(q)
ii.
and the
(s)
City of Toronto Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, Ch. 11, Sched. A, as amended, sections 8,
10, 86, 94, and 380;
(t)
(u)
(v)
Rules 14.05(2) and (3) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O., 1990, Reg. 194;
(w)
Rule 17.02(i) in support of service without leave on the defendants Uber B.V. and
Rasier Operations B.V.; and
(x)
3.
such further and other grounds as counsel may advise and this Court may permit.
The following documentary evidence will be used at the hearing of the Application:
(a)
Affidavit of Tracey Cook, sworn November 17, 2014, and attached exhibits;
(b)
Affidavit of Steve Reesor, sworn November 17, 2014, and attached exhibits; and
(c)
such further and other evidence as counsel may advise and this Court may permit.
CITY OF TORONTO
Applicant
i3ETWEEN:
-and-
MICHELE A. WRIGHT
40724W
LSUC#:
Tel:
416-397-5342
416-397-5624
Fax:
mwright4toronto.ca
E-mail:
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
ONTARIO