Landmark Uber Deactivation Case Heads to Full Bench of Fair Work Commission
The ‘Good in ‘the Good, the Bad and the Ugly’ from our podcast on Restraint of Trade – Part Two, from 8 August 2025
In a first-of-its-kind case under Australia’s new unfair deactivation laws, the Fair Work Commission has referred the matter of Mohammad Shareef Hotak v Rasier Pacific Pty Ltd (Uber) to a final hearing before the Full Bench.
Background
Mohammad Shareef Hotak worked as an Uber driver from November 2020 until his account was deactivated on 8 April 2025 following an alleged safety incident. The incident involved a late-night trip in Adelaide where passengers accused Mr Hotak of threatening them with a baseball bat. Mr Hotak denied the allegation, stating he was assaulted after asking the passengers to stop using drugs in his vehicle. He immediately reported the incident to police.
Uber issued a preliminary deactivation notice on 29 March 2025 and a final notice on 8 April 2025. Mr Hotak filed an application for an unfair deactivation remedy under section 536LU of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). On 19 May 2025, Uber reactivated his account, and he resumed driving, completing over 150 trips
Legal Arguments
Uber argued that the application should be dismissed because Mr Hotak was no longer deactivated and therefore not eligible for relief. They also contended that the only remedy available under the Act is reactivation, which had already occurred, making the application without reasonable prospects of success.
However, the Commission rejected this argument, citing section 587(2) of the Act, which was amended by the Fair Work Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Act 2024 (Cth). This provision prohibits the Commission from dismissing unfair deactivation applications on the ground that they have no reasonable prospects of success.
Mr Hotak, represented by the Transport Workers’ Union, argued that reactivation should restore him to the position he would have been in but for the deactivation. This includes consideration of lost income and other impacts, not just access to the platform
What’s Next
The Commission has determined that the matter will proceed to a final hearing before the Full Bench. This will be the first time the Commission considers the scope and application of the new unfair deactivation provisions introduced in 2024.
The hearing will address whether Uber’s reactivation of Mr Hotak’s account satisfies the legal remedy and whether further orders, such as restoration of lost earnings, may be appropriate under section 536LQ of the Act.
This case is being closely watched by platform workers, unions, and legal professionals, as it may set a precedent for how digital labour platforms manage deactivations and worker rights under the evolving industrial relations framework.
This content is general in nature and provides a summary of the issues covered. It is not intended to be, nor should it be relied upon, as legal or professional advice for specific employment situations.