Thi Diem Ha Tran v Portier Pacific Pty Ltd Summary

[2025] FWC 1575

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.536LU - Application for an unfair deactivation remedy

Thi Diem Ha Tran
v

Portier Pacific Pty Ltd

(UDE2025/63)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAUNDERS

NEWCASTLE, 6 JUNE 2025

Application for an unfair deactivation remedy - application dismissed

Ms Tran has made an unfair deactivation application against Portier Pacific Pty Ltd trading as Uber Eats.

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)).

There is no dispute that Ms Tran commenced working for Uber in January or February 2025 and was deactivated by Uber in May 2025.

Ms Tran is not protected from unfair deactivation because, at the time of her deactivation, she had not performed work for Uber on a regular basis for a period of at least 6 months. It follows that Ms Tran’s unfair deactivation application must be dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Ms Thi Diem Ha Tran has lodged an application for an unfair deactivation remedy against Portier Pacific Pty Ltd, trading as Uber Eats, with the Fair Work Commission. Ms Tran's application seeks to address what she claims is an unfair deactivation from the Uber Eats platform. This application arises under section 536LU of the Fair Work Act 2009, which mandates that individuals must be protected from unfair deactivation to obtain a remedy. One of the key requirements for this protection is that the individual must have been performing work on a digital labour platform on a regular basis for at least six months.

The primary legal issue before the Deputy President was whether Ms Tran met the statutory requirement of performing work on the digital labour platform for at least six months continuously. Ms Tran started working for Uber Eats in early 2025 and was deactivated in May 2025. The Deputy President examined the duration of Ms Tran's engagement with Uber Eats to determine if it met the statutory requirement. Given that Ms Tran had not worked for Uber Eats for a continuous period of six months by the time of her deactivation, she did not meet the statutory threshold for protection against unfair deactivation.

In reaching the decision, the Deputy President considered the statutory requirement under section 536LD(c) of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Deputy President noted that Ms Tran had been active on the platform for a shorter period than required by law. Consequently, the Deputy President concluded that Ms Tran was not protected from unfair deactivation, and her application must be dismissed due to the insufficiency of her engagement period. The dismissal of the application was based on the statutory requirement that was not fulfilled.

The Fair Work Commission dismissed Ms Tran's application for an unfair deactivation remedy, as she had not met the requisite period of continuous work on the digital labour platform.

Thi Diem Ha Tran v Portier Pacific Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established