The agreement specifies Delaware law as the governing law and designates federal or state courts in San Francisco, California as the exclusive venue for legal proceedings, with California courts having exclusive jurisdiction over non-arbitrated claims.
This analysis describes what Uber's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
This provision establishes the legal framework and venue applicable to disputes that proceed outside arbitration, including any claims by users who have opted out of the arbitration clause. The choice of Delaware law and California venue may affect the procedural rights available to users in other jurisdictions.
Interpretive note: Choice-of-law clauses in consumer contracts may not effectively displace mandatory consumer protection provisions in EU, UK, and certain US state jurisdictions, creating variance in how this provision applies across Uber's user base.
Under this clause, disputes not resolved through arbitration are subject to Delaware law and must be brought in courts in San Francisco, California. Users in other states or countries who have successfully opted out of arbitration would need to litigate in California under Delaware law, which may create practical barriers to pursuing claims.
How other platforms handle this
These Terms shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, excluding its conflicts of law rules, and the federal laws of the United States. Any dispute arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms shall be finally settled by arbitration in San Francisco County, California...
These Terms of Service and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with them or their subject matter or formation (including non-contractual disputes or claims) shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, without giving effect to any choice o...
These Terms are governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota, without giving effect to any choice of law or conflict of law provisions. Any disputes not subject to arbitration will be resolved in the state or federal courts located in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Monitoring
Uber has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, without regard to its conflict of law provisions. Any legal action or proceeding arising under these Terms will be brought exclusively in the federal or state courts located in San Francisco, California.— Excerpt from Uber's Uber Terms of Use
1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Choice-of-law clauses in consumer contracts interact with state consumer protection statutes, some of which cannot be contractually waived by choice of another state's law. California courts have applied the consumer protection laws of a plaintiff's home state in appropriate circumstances regardless of choice-of-law clauses. EU and UK consumer protection frameworks also restrict choice-of-law clauses that deprive consumers of the protections of their home jurisdiction. 2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. The combination of Delaware governing law and San Francisco venue creates a forum that may not be practically accessible for all users with non-arbitrated claims, which may raise concerns under applicable consumer protection law in certain jurisdictions. 3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU users are protected under EU Regulation 593/2008 (Rome I) and Directive 93/13, which limit the ability of platform operators to deprive EU consumers of the protections of their member state's mandatory law. UK consumers retain similar protections under UK private international law. California residents may retain additional rights under California consumer protection statutes regardless of the Delaware governing law clause. 4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Enterprise customers and B2B accounts should assess whether the governing law and jurisdiction clause is appropriate for their specific commercial relationship with Uber, as different considerations apply to commercial versus consumer contracts. 5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Compliance teams should assess whether the governing law clause effectively displaces mandatory consumer protection provisions in key markets, particularly the EU, UK, and California, and whether this creates any disclosure obligations or regulatory exposure.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Monitor: 25 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Compliance Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
This provision establishes the legal framework and venue applicable to disputes that proceed outside arbitration, including any claims by users who have opted out of the arbitration clause. The choice of Delaware law and California venue may affect the procedural rights available to users in other jurisdictions.
Under this clause, disputes not resolved through arbitration are subject to Delaware law and must be brought in courts in San Francisco, California. Users in other states or countries who have successfully opted out of arbitration would need to litigate in California under Delaware law, which may create practical barriers to pursuing claims.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 199 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Uber.