Abdalla v Rasier Pacific Pty Ltd [2024] NSWCATCD 7

Abdalla v Rasier Pacific Pty Ltd [2024] NSWCATCD 7

The respondents breached the Services Agreement because the Tribunal was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the applicant did not make the comments alleged in the 20 February 2022 complaint and therefore had not breached the Community Guidelines or the Services Agreement. The respondents also failed to establish that any discretion to deactivate access was reasonably exercised, because there was no evidence of a genuine review of the complaint's substance and reliability or of a reasonable opportunity for the applicant to respond with sufficient details. To the extent clause 4 permitted deactivation without notice or cause, or on an untested complaint not disclosed to the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Consumer Claim for Breach of Contract and Related Unfair Contract Term Issues Concerning Deactivation of Uber Driver Access / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
The respondents were ordered to pay the applicant $1000 damages for breach of contract immediately, and the application was otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
['breach of Contract' "deactivation of Uber Driver's Access to the Uber App" 'unfair Contract Terms' 'small Business Contract' 'standard Form Contract' 'damages for Breach of Contract' 'reinstatement']
['consumer Law' 'contract Law'] ['breach of Contract' "deactivation of Uber Driver's Access to the Uber App" 'unfair Contract Terms' 'small Business Contract' 'standard Form Contract' 'damages for Breach of Contract' 'reinstatement']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Consumer Claim for Breach of Contract and Related Unfair Contract Term Issues Concerning Deactivation of Uber Driver Access / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondents breached the Services Agreement by deactivating the applicant's access to the Driver App on 20 February 2022." 'If so, to what remedy the applicant was entitled.' 'Whether a term permitting termination or deactivation without notice or cause would be void as an unfair contract term under ss 23-25 of the Australian Consumer Law (NSW).' 'Whether a term limiting damages recoverable for breach of contract would be void as an unfair contract term under ss 23-25 of the Australian Consumer Law (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents breached the Services Agreement because the Tribunal was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the applicant did not make the comments alleged in the 20 February 2022 complaint and therefore had not breached the Community Guidelines or the Services Agreement. The respondents also failed to establish that any discretion to deactivate access was reasonably exercised, because there was no evidence of a genuine review of the complaint's substance and reliability or of a reasonable opportunity for the applicant to respond with sufficient details. To the extent clause 4 permitted deactivation without notice or cause, or on an untested complaint not disclosed to the...

Court Disposition

The respondents were ordered to pay the applicant $1000 damages for breach of contract immediately, and the application was otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The Respondents Rasier Pacific Pty Ltd and Uber BV are to pay the Applicant, Salahadeen Suliman Hussaen Abdalla, damages for breach of contract in the sum of $1000, immediately.' 'The application is otherwise dismissed.']