Dan Bahadur Shrestha v Portier Pacific Pty Ltd
At a glance
- 1
What happened
the Applicant lodged an unfair dismissal application against Portier Pacific Pty Ltd on March 6, 2026. He claimed dismissal occurred on October 29, 2020. The Fair Work Commission identified jurisdictional issues, including the application being lodged significantly outside the statutory timeframe and the Applicant’s potential classification as an Uber Eats delivery partner, which would mean he wasn't a national system employee. The Commission also noted he may not have met the minimum employment period to claim unfair dismissal. Despite multiple attempts to contact the Applicant and provide him with information, he did not respond.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant’s unfair dismissal application. Deputy President Beaumont found the Applicant’s failure to respond to correspondence regarding jurisdictional issues demonstrated a lack of willingness to participate in the proceedings. The Commission dismissed the application under section 587(3)(a) of the Fair Work Act, citing a want of prosecution. The application was lodged outside the statutory timeframe and the Applicant's status as an Uber Eats delivery partner was also considered.
What it means for employers
Employers using digital labour platforms should be aware of the ongoing legal scrutiny regarding the classification of workers. Ensuring correct classification as an employee or contractor is crucial to avoid potential claims. Maintaining clear communication with workers and documenting all interactions is also important.
What it means for employees
Employees need to be aware of strict time limits for lodging unfair dismissal applications. Failure to respond to correspondence from the Fair Work Commission can result in an application being dismissed. Workers who believe they are employees of a platform like Uber Eats should understand their rights and protections.
Want this applied to your situation?
Reading the decision is free. FairWork Mate goes further — it reads the full case library and applies precedents like this one to your specific facts, citing the cases as it reasons. General information, not a guaranteed outcome or legal advice.
Send your details to Liquid Employment Lawyers
Liquid Employment Lawyers is a paid legal service and our referral partner, not free Fair Work advice. FairWork Mate may receive a referral fee from Liquid Legal. Tell them what has happened and a member of their team will call you back. For free general guidance, use our tools or call the Fair Work Ombudsman on 13 13 94.
Prefer to read first? About Liquid Employment Lawyers · Not sure if you need a lawyer? Read the legal help guides
Want more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The AI advisor answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus — awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts — with a citation to the underlying decision on every answer.
FairWork Mate AI
This is one decision. Pro reads all of them.
Free case pages cite the top 250 decisions. Pro opens the full Fair Work Commission and Federal Court library, cross-references your own situation against it, and cites the decision behind every answer — plus document upload, so it can read your letter or contract line by line. 150 questions a month, cancel anytime.
Renews monthly at A$29.99 until you cancel. By continuing you agree to our Terms.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.