s.536LU - Application for an unfair deactivation remedy

Application for an unfair deactivation remedy - application dismissed

• [1] Mr Nanday has made an unfair deactivation application against Rasier Pacific Pty Ltd trading as Uber.

• [2] A person must be protected from unfair deactivation in order to be able to obtain a remedy for unfair deactivation. One of the requirements a person must meet to be protected from unfair deactivation is that they have been performing work on a digital labour platform on a regular basis for a period of at least 6 months (s 536LD(c) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)).

• [3] There is no dispute that Mr Nanday performed some work for Uber for a few months in 2017 and started performing work for Uber again on 3 March 2025. Mr Nanday continued performing work for Uber from 3 March 2025 until he was deactivated on 2 April 2025.

• [4] Mr Nanday is not protected from unfair deactivation because, at the time of his deactivation, he had not performed work for Uber on a regular basis for a period of at least 6 months. It follows that Mr Nanday's unfair deactivation application must be dismissed.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer