California Drivers Sue BP, Walmart, 7-Eleven Over Alleged AI Gas Price Fixing 
US Jobs Report Preview: June Payroll Growth Seen Slowing as Fed Rate Decision Looms 
Kawasaki Heavy Shares Slide on Report of ¥200 Billion Capital Raise Plan 
US Stock Futures Hold Steady Ahead of June Jobs Report as Fed Rate Outlook Remains in Focus 
Switch Seeks $2 Billion Funding at Nearly $50 Billion Valuation Ahead of Potential IPO 
Anthropic Tightens AI Access Controls After Reports of China-Based Workarounds 
U.S. Supreme Court to Review Trump Administration Appeal on Immigrant Detention Without Bond Hearings 
HSBC Australia Faces A$35M Penalty Over Scam Protection Failures 
Trump Threatens ABC News Lawsuit Over Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool Coverage 
DOJ Clears Paramount Skydance-Warner Bros. Discovery Merger Without Conditions 
In a rebuke to Trump, the Supreme Court rules that birthright citizenship is the law of the land 
Denmark Central Bank Intervenes to Support Krone Peg Against Euro 
Meta Stock Jumps as AI Cloud Expansion Challenges AWS, Microsoft, and Google 
DOJ Orders Crackdown on Birth Tourism After Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship 
Colombia Opens New Investigation Into Former President Álvaro Uribe Over Paramilitary Allegations 
California Court Dismisses Trump Administration Lawsuit Against Los Angeles Sanctuary Policy 
SoftBank’s LY Corp, Bain Raise Kakaku.com Bid to ¥670 Billion, Intensifying Takeover Battle 
The Seoul Administrative Court overturned an administrative labor agency’s decision recognizing ride-hailing service Tada drivers as workers.
SOCAR, the parent company of Tada operator VCNC, filed a suit to seek the cancellation of the National Labor Relations Commission’s retrial ruling on relief of unfair dismissals.
According to the court, the Tada drivers, who were the defendants, signed a replacement driver contract with the plaintiff’s partner companies to provide a replacement driving service, while having no contractual relationship with the plaintiff.
The court determined that by driving from the pickup place to the drop-off destination based on orders placed by Tada service users, it is groundless to claim that the defendants’ work was determined unilaterally by the plaintiff.
The court emphasized that the drivers had the discretion to accept or reject orders and that the nature of their work, including pickup location, drop-off location, and route traveled, was governed by the orders submitted by clients.
Due to the need to reduce the number of cars, VCNC, which operated Tada under freelancing contracts with drivers, fired roughly 70 drivers in July 2019.
As a result, the defendants filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Commission alleging that they were arbitrarily fired after working under VCNC's management and supervision.
