The Court, analysing the constitutionality of Sao Paolo’s Municipal Law No. 16/279/15 which prohibited the use of services like Uber, concluded that: (i) the service is legal on account of being regulated by the Civil Code; (ii) the service produces benefits for the consumer; (iii) it is unconstitutional to prohibit Uber; (iv) its benefits are a by-product of competition; (v) the dangers of “Regulatory Capture” are on account of taxi unions and the importance of Judicial Power proceedings, (vi) it produces environmental benefits and ease of transportation; (vii) Uber is not a taxi therefore taxi rules do not apply to it.