[2025] FWC 2470
Citation: [2025] FWC 2470
What happened
Mr Sajjad Nasir sought orders from the Fair Work Commission (FWC) to remove a published decision and judgment from the Commission’s website, suppress his identity, withdraw a recusal application, and notify the Australian High Court. This followed an appeal (C2024/277) against a decision not to issue a certificate under the Fair Work Act 2009. Mr Nasir had previously initiated proceedings in the High Court (S145/2024) seeking writs of mandamus and certiorari against the FWC and a presiding member. The High Court dismissed this application, finding Mr Nasir had discontinued earlier proceedings and had not made a recusal application. The FWC decision also references an Apprehended Violence Protection Order (AVPO) against Mr Nasir.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed Mr Nasir’s application for orders. The Commission found Mr Nasir did not establish grounds for the orders sought, particularly regarding procedural fairness and suppression of identity. The Commission noted Mr Nasir’s identity was already referenced in a published High Court decision. The Commission also found no record of a recusal application being made. The Commission determined the application based solely on the information provided in the application form, without further proceedings.
What it means for employers
Employers should be aware of the Fair Work Commission’s power to restrict publication of decisions and identities under s 594 of the Fair Work Act. This power is exercised to protect sensitive information or personal safety. Employers should ensure procedural fairness is followed in decision-making processes to avoid challenges.
What it means for employees
Employees seeking to challenge Fair Work decisions should be aware of the procedural requirements and the potential for decisions to be published. Employees should ensure any applications, such as for recusal, are properly made and documented. Challenges to decisions should be pursued through the correct legal channels.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2025fwc2470.pdfWant more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The full dataset, with structured fields for awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts, is available through the Business API. FairWork Mate AI answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. API + AI access is a paid product. Contact us for pricing or a 50% off first month.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.
Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
This summary was drafted by AI from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections →