Ahmed v Al-Hussain Pty Ltd t/as The Cheesecake Shop

Background 7 Mr Ahmed originally was represented by counsel and solicitors who acted for him pro bono, but they have recently ceased to act. He appeared and represented himself at the hearing today. Mr Ahmed annexed to his principal affidavit of 11 July 2018 a large number of documents, including bank statements on which he drew to support his contentions that, first, he had been underpaid what his contractual entitlements were and, secondly, he had withdrawn, usually round figure, lump sums of cash from his bank accounts that he claimed had been paid as cashback payments to Mr Zahid and or, after Mr Zahid left for Pakistan, Mr Bhatti. 8 Mr Ahmed worked for the employer on a part-time basis through 2014, learning, effectively, how to cook and work as a pastry cook. He obtained sufficient qualifications to satisfy the requirements for him to be granted the visa, on 15 September 2015, sponsored by the employer through Mr Zahid. 9 Before this, however, Mr Zahid had offered to sponsor Mr Ahmed to stay in Australia and work in the employer's business. Mr Zahid suggested a migration agent/lawyer to assist in the sponsorship application, and Mr Ahmed paid $3,000 to the lawyer to begin the process. Sometime between March and June 2014, Mr Ahmed had a discussion with Mr Zahid. Mr Ahmed told him that he had been advised by the lawyer that the sponsor had to pay the fees for the visa. When Mr Zahid refused to do so, the lawyer refunded $2,500 of the fee to Mr Ahmed. 10 Between September and December 2014, the two men had a further conversation in which Mr Zahid told Mr Ahmed that Mr Zahid and his wife wanted him to accept a fulltime contract but that they were not able to pay the sponsorship expenses at the moment. Mr Zahid said that they would repay those expenses later when the business was going better. Mr Ahmed said that he could not pay all the money at once. Mr Zahid agreed that he would reimburse the $5,000 fee for the visa fee later once the business had more money if Mr Ahmed paid it to the lawyer. When Mr Ahmed asked Mr Zahid to put in writing his promise to reimburse the balance of the moneys due in respect of the visa application, Mr Zahid said that he did not want to do so but would not run away with the money. Mr Ahmed claimed that, following 20 December 2014, he incurred expenses relating to the sponsorship of the visa application of over $18,000. 11 On 20 December 2014, the employer and Mr Ahmed entered into the 2014 contract, being an individual flexibility employment agreement. Under the 2014 contract, Mr Ahmed was entitled to a four year long-term appointment from the date of the visa grant. He agreed to work 38 hours a week, as prescribed by the National Employment Standard, and was entitled to four weeks of annual leave under that Standard. He was to be paid a total package of $59,130, including a yearly salary of $54,000 and superannuation of $5,130. The 2014 contract entitled Mr Ahmed to receive four weeks' written notice of termination by the employer without cause or an equivalent payment in lieu of notice, but he could be summarily dismissed on other bases. There is no claim in this proceeding for entitlements arising from the termination of Mr Ahmed's employment.