Sajjad Ali Syed v Uber Australia Pty Ltd

[2023] FWC 959

[2023] FWC 959

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Sajjad Ali Syed
v

Uber Australia Pty Ltd

(U2023/2628)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT O’NEILL MELBOURNE, 21 APRIL 2023

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy

1. On 28 March 2023 Mr Sajjad Ali Syed made an application to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).

1. Mr Syed in his application alleged that he was unfairly dismissed by Uber Australia Pty Ltd (the Respondent).

1. On 3 April 2023 the Commission served Mr Syed’s application on the Respondent and requested that it file a Form F3 no later than 4.00 pm on 10 April 2023.

1. No Form F3 was received, so on 12 April 2023 the Commission emailed the Respondent to request the Form F3 as a matter of urgency.

1. On 13 April 2023 the Respondent replied to advise that the proper Respondent is ‘Raiser Pacific Pty Ltd’ and that it did not intend to file a Form F3 as it had “received correspondence from the Applicant confirming that they intend to withdraw their application”. Mr Syed was copied into this correspondence.

1. The Commission then emailed Mr Syed and asked him to confirm urgently by return email if he intends to withdraw his application, based on the information provided by the Respondent.

1. No response was received, so on 14 April 2023 the Commission again emailed Mr Syed to request that he advise the Commission if he intends to discontinue his application. That correspondence also advised that his application may be dismissed without further notice if no reply was received by 4.00 pm Wednesday 19 April 2023.

1. To date there has been no response from Mr Syed.

1. Section 587(1) of the FW Act provides as follows:

587 Dismissing applications

(1) Without limiting when the FWC may dismiss an application, the FWC may dismiss an application if:

(a) the application is not made in accordance with this Act; or

(b) the application is frivolous or vexatious; or

(c) the application has no reasonable prospect of success.

1. As Mr Syed has failed to respond to the correspondence of the Commission, I am satisfied he has failed to prosecute his claim and that his application has no reasonable prospect of success.

1. As such, the application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(c) of the FW Act.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR761298>