Isla Mujeres, Pr. ROO.- In view of the changes in the Mobility Law of the State of Quintana Roo, there are at least 15 active Emparos with which the regulation of private passenger transportation service and distribution with the use of services and procedures digital application.
The guarantee lawsuits are led by the company Uber México Technology & Software, SA de CV and supported by some of its driving partners, but also by delivery men and drivers of micromobility services, such as motorcycle taxis.
Local deputy Julian Ricard Magana acknowledged that a backlash in Congress was expected because of the new legal provisions, but that it could come from imposing a percentage of the cost of each trip that companies must contribute to the state or destination. The economic funds to be given would enter a trust, but some of the claims are “novel.”
The aforementioned company legally believes that the regulation is “not fair” to drivers as the terms of the new requirements were legally established, and if restrictions are imposed, than the list of permits required in public transport service concessions. They will continue to be a hindrance.
In the trial of the Unit’s Eighth District Court of Guaranty 32689911, the requirement to process the Declaration of Stability and Road Regulation, and a special license before the Institute of Mobility of the State of Quintana Roo (Imovaceru) is legally challenged.
The claim says that the institute has been given a period of one year to prepare the infrastructure for issuing licenses and permits, and another period of 180 days to issue the general provisions of the declaration, which are required to secure Necessary for – Conduct.
said in an interview with the local MLA century light that “I hope the Mobility Act has considered this so that this will not be a delaying tactic, I think as a Government and Legislature it will leave us in a very bad position. To help with these reforms we have created the Mobility supported the executive through the institution. we’re going to analyze it and hope that wasn’t what we least want there to be conflict, we’re going to continue to see violence in some form or the other.
Of the 15 injunctions requesting federal protection against certain regulatory changes, only Uber received a favorable provisional settlement, but it did not do enough to protect its driving partners.
The company says that the private transportation service is a tripartite business model, in which the company exercises its right to free trade, makes a profit, and users benefit from the convenience of the application, but the service relies on drivers, who are a Receive remuneration and access to self-employment.
The above company was dissatisfied with the decision of the court and filed complaint appeal 32713693, which was declared unfounded by the Second Collegiate Court, requesting clarification.
As part of the process, one of the three magistrates declined to support the request and the decision of the other two is awaited, although if it is in the same sense, the request is described as “notoriously unacceptable”. will be rejected as such.
Of the remaining cases in litigation, there are six amparos most advanced in their processing in the Fifth District Court, and they denied provisional suspensions and then Julián Javier Hernández (32698267), Julio César Castillo (32698277), Abdel Figueroa (32698285) , Carlos Alberto Ramirez (32698290), Simone Carozza (32698303) and Johan Jose Garcia (32698313).
There are four other trials in the Fourth District Court in which Fernando Pech (32699579) and Oscar Gutierrez (32699634) have been denied provisional suspensions, in addition to trials 32699550 and 32699608 in which the identities of the applicants have not been disclosed.
In the Seventh Court, the two amporos of Israel Ernesto Morales (32698041) and Enrique Pech (32698043) are analyzed, and in the Ninth Court the cases of Miguel Saucedo (32698829) and several complainants (32698763), but all was also denied a provisional suspension.
Ricardo Magaña expressed that the legal changes “should have been agreed upon at first a hard-earned job, but in the end they were accepted by both parties, and it clearly helps us to understand one of the important parties like Uber”. does. , was not satisfied. It worries me because the issue with Uber is the most serious issue, not the most important issue. To me it’s that people continue to travel like animals in those vans, that’s the most important thing Is, secondly, I repeat again, is the fastest.