On Thursday, Glovo began to cleanse his judicial horizon. The judge rejected the Eat trial against Glovo for unfair competition, in which 295 million compensation was delivered. The resolution, in addition to the deviation of the claims by Just Eat, enters into defense of the market economy and in criticism of the Echo of the Union of Spain, which, according to Judge Alvaro Lobato, represented two labor inspectors who seemed witnesses.
According to Just EAT, which holds its distributors as employees or subcontracting with other companies, the false autonomous Glovo should not be connected in order not to work in the market with the same rules.
The judge excludes and even goes further, saying that the two autonomous models that Glovo used after the historical proposal of the Supreme 2020, and that both the labor inspectorate and the prosecutor consider the mockery of labor rules and the Criminal Code, “mainly guarantee autonomy and independence from drivers to configure autonomous legal relations.”
Moreover, the judge cannot avoid the praise of the Glovo Labor model: “It is difficult to imagine the hired regime of labor, which gives its employees an extraordinary degree of autonomy in order to freely organize their work and have their own time.”
The judge especially diligently against labor inspectors who monitored the highway to Glovo and found that their autonomous changes in the model continued to violate the rules of labor. In the statements of both officials, “it seemed that it resonated with the thunderous unanimous, nostalgic echo of the Union of Spain, the“ yesterday’s world ”of administrative and bureaucratic,” criticizes the magistrate.
In an unusual assessment of testimony in the commercial procedure, the judge guarantees that the words of officials “must be recurrent because they suffer from undeniable group bias.” He even points to inspectors for their “heuristic labels and behavioral prejudices.” “The decision -making processes are inevitably polluted by psychological trends that have deep biological anchors,” the judge says.
The justice of the peace claims that “fully realizes” that “the key to the storage” Just Eat’s requirements against Glovo is labor legislation, but recalls that its jurisdiction in advertising comes to the conclusion that “the script regulated by the right of competition is little communicates with the toativian and protectionist nature of labor law.”
Just “freedom of business” EAT, concludes magistrates, did not suffer from false self -government Glovo. His presence in the market does not indicate an offer that includes a statement in favor of a free market: “Rules, the better, for all the same ones, and the rest should be the result of the market interaction, because, without a doubt, this is the best tool for the distribution of resources when the liba invented by the human mind.”
