Emma Arbuthnot (pictured), the chief magistrate who reinstated Uber’s London license
The judge in Uber’s legal battle to operate in London has stepped down to avoid any conflict of interest over her husband’s links to the company.
Emma Arbuthnot, the chief magistrate who reinstated Uber’s London license after it was judged not a ‘fit and proper’ private car hire operator, has withdrawn from hearing further appeals from the firm.
It comes after an investigation raised questions over links between her husband’s work and the company.
Senior Tory Lord Arbuthnot was the director of SC Strategy Ltd, which advised one of Uber’s largest investors, Qatar Investment Authority, until December 31 last year – three weeks after the start of the company’s appeal, revealed the Observer.
Once this connection was pointed out however, a spokesman for the judiciary confirmed that Lady Arbuthnot would not hear Uber-related cases in the future.
‘The chief magistrate had been due to hear a licensing appeal by Uber in Brighton at a date yet to be fixed,’ the spokesman said.
‘However, as soon as this link was pointed out to her, she assigned the case to a fellow judge. It is essential that judges not only are, but are seen to be, absolutely impartial.’
The spokesman added that it it was the first time that the chief magistrate and her husband had been made aware of such a link.
Pictured: London cab drivers protest against Uber in central London, on February 10, 2016
Lady Arbuthnot approved a probationary 15-month licence for Uber to once again operate in the capital in June.
This was after the company was told nine-months prior that Transport for London would not renew its licence.
Although Lord Arbuthnot, a former Tory MP for North East Hampshire, and chair of the defence select committee, stood down as a director of the strategy firm last year, his parliamentary website states that he remains a senior consultant to the company.
Mick Rix, national officer with the GMB union which contested Uber’s London licence, said: ‘GMB is surprised by the suggested connection between magistrate Arbuthnot’s husband and Uber,
‘Any matter which may be perceived as a conflict of interest is required to be drawn to the attention of the parties involved in any litigation at the outset.’