A New Jersey couple who suffered serious injuries in an Uber accident will not be able to sue the ride-hailing company due to an arbitration clause they agreed to when accepting the terms of service for an unrelated Uber Eats order, a court has ruled.
John and Georgia McGinty were in the back seat of an Uber vehicle in March 2022 when their driver ran a red light and collided with another car, resulting in significant physical, psychological, and financial harm. Georgia sustained multiple fractures, including in her cervical and lumbar spine, while John experienced reduced use of his left wrist and a fractured sternum.
Despite their desire to pursue a jury trial against Uber, an appellate court ruled they could not do so, citing their prior agreement to arbitration as part of Uber’s updated terms and conditions, which apply to both Uber rides and Uber Eats orders.
The McGintys contended that their minor daughter, who used Georgia’s phone to order food, had inadvertently accepted the terms by verifying her age as 18. However, the court maintained that Uber’s terms are “valid and enforceable,” stipulating that disputes over auto accidents or personal injuries must be resolved through binding arbitration rather than in court.
Uber responded, stating that Georgia had accepted the terms of use multiple times, including in early 2021, and emphasized that the plaintiffs could not definitively prove their daughter had placed the order independently.
Expressing their dismay, the McGintys said they were “surprised and heartbroken” by the appellate court’s decision, which they believe allows a large corporation like Uber to escape legal accountability for consumer injuries due to complex contractual language.
Previously, a lower court ruled that Uber’s arbitration clause was not enforceable, but after the company appealed, the appellate judges sided with Uber, affirming the enforceability of its terms of service.
