Court Cases overview

Country	Platform	Associated Parties	Ruling Status	Ruling in favour of self-employed status or employee status	Ruling Date	Summary	Platform Fairwork Score (out of 10)
Argentina	Repartos Ya S.A.	Repartos Ya S.A. / Deliverers	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2021	Repartos Ya failed to disprove the presumption of employment.	No ratings available
Argentina	Rappi	Rappi / Rojas Luis Roger Miguel y otros	Ruled in favour of workers	No - Platform ban	2019	The judge finds that the denial of access to the platform for the riders and drivers petitioning multiple complaints regarding the working conditions is a violation of the right to freedom of association.	0 Fairwork Ratings
Australia	Uber	Uber / Australian Competition and Consumer Commission	Ruled in favour of workers	No - misleading representation of fares and fees	2022	An Australian court has fined Uber 14 million dollars for threatening cancellation fees it never charged and overstating fare estimates on some rides.	No ratings available
Australia	Deliveroo	Deliveroo / Mr Franco	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2021	The Fair Work Commission (FWC) found that Mr Franco was an employee and was unfairly dismissed.	No ratings available
Belgium	Deliveroo	Deliveroo / Riders	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2023	Deliveroo couriers should be classed as employees.	1 Fairwork Ratings
Brazil	Uber, et al.	Supremo Tribunal Federal	In progress		2024	The first ruling by the Federal Supreme Court on the possibility of standardising the relationship between platforms and workers is in favour of such a practice. An emblematic case to be decided by the court would serve as a guide for all instances across the country.	0 Fairwork Ratings
Brazil	iFood	0000531-27.2023.5.07.0013	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2024	The 13th Labour Court of Fortaleza recognised the employment relationship between a rider and the company Ifood.	2 Fairwork Ratings
Brazil	iFood		Ruled against workers	Yes - Employed status	2023	The 3rd Labor Court of Campo Grande in Mato Grosso recognized the employment relationship between iFood and one of its drivers	2 Fairwork Ratings
Brazil	Rappi	Ministério Público do Trabalho / Rappi	Ruled against workers	Yes -Self-employed status	2023	November 2023: The Federal Supreme overturned the October decision. October 2023: A regional labor court sentenced Rappi to hire all the drivers who worked for the platform for at least six months between 2017 and May 2023.	0 Fairwork Ratings
Brazil	Ixia Gerenciamento de Negócio Ltda	Ministério Público Do Trabalho (MPT) / Ixia Gerenciamento de Negócio Ltda	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2022	The relationship between Ixia Gerenciamento de Negócio Ltda and its crowd workers is an employment relation.	0 Fairwork Ratings
Canada	Uber	Uber Technologies Inc. v. Heller	Ruled in favour of workers	No - Arbitration agreement	2020	The Supreme Court of Canada held that Uber’s arbitration agreement with its drivers was invalid — largely on the basis that it prescribed the Netherlands as the place of arbitration.	No ratings available
Finland	Wolt	Wolt / Hämeenlinna Administrative Court	Ruled against workers	Yes - Self-employed status	2024	Wolt couriers are self-employed rather than employees.
France	Deliveroo	Deliveroo / Riders	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2022	The Labor Court reclassified the service contract of four couriers as a contract of work. Deliveroo was ordered to pay 9.7 million euros of social security contributions.	4 Fairwork Ratings
France	Uber	Cour de cassation Ruling n° 374 FP-P+B+R+I	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2020	The Cour de Cassation ruled that a former Uber driver should have been considered an employee instead of a self-employed partner.	4 Fairwork Ratings
France	Take Eat Easy	Cour de cassation, Chambre sociale ECLI:FR:CCASS:2018:SO01737	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2018	The Cour de Cassation ruled that the Take Eat Easy riders were employees.	No ratings available
Germany	Lieferando		Ruled in favour of workers	No - Working conditions	2021	The Federal Court in Erfurt decided that Lieferando must provide couriers with work equipment.	7 Fairwork Ratings
Germany	Crowdworkers	Bundesarbeitsgericht / Crowdworkers	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2020	For the first time ever, the German Federal Labour Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht) has recognised a crowdworker as having the legal status of an employee.	Fairwork Ratings
India	Urban Company	Urban Company / Gurugram District Court	The suit was withdrawn	No - Right to strike	2022	Urban Company filed a lawsuit in the Gurugram district court against its “partners” for protesting against the company’s alleged “unfair labour practices”. At first, the court restrained the protesters from holding demonstrations in front and the back gate of the plaintiff’s company office within the 100-meter area. Then, it found the company’s filings “devoid of merits”, and Urban Company withdrew the suit.	5 Fairwork Ratings
India	Ola	Uber / Delhi Commercial Driver Union	The petition was withdrawn	Yes - Employee status	2017	The unions of Ola and Uber drivers claimed that the drivers are entitled to basic labour protection since they should be classified as workmen. However, the petition was withdrawn.	0 Fairwork Ratings
India	Uber	Uber / Delhi Commercial Driver Union	The petition was withdrawn	Yes - Employee status	2017	The unions of Ola and Uber drivers claimed that the drivers are entitled to basic labour protection since they should be classified as workmen. However, the petition was withdrawn.	1 Fairwork Ratings
Italy	Foodinho (Glovo)	Foodinho (Glovo) / Riders	Ruled in favour of workers	No - algorithms	2023	Foodihno's selection system (Glovo) has been found to be discriminatory.	No ratings available
Italy	Uber Eats Deliveroo	Uber Eats & Deliveroo / Riders	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2023	The Labour Section of the Milan Court ordered Deliveroo and Uber Eats to pay their riders social security and pension contributions.	No ratings available
Italy	Uber Eats	Uber Eats / Riders	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2023	The dismissals of 4,000 Uber Eats riders are "illegitimate."	No ratings available
Italy	Glovo	Foodinho (Glovo) / NIdiL, Filt, Filcams, and CGIL	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2023	Foodhino (Glovo) must pay arrears to two riders starting in 2019. The entire shift in which the rider is logged into the platform is considered work time and has to be paid consequently.	No ratings available
Italy	Glovo	Glovo / CGIL	Ruled in favour of workers	No	2023	The platform must explain how its algorithm works in the rides’ allocation.	No ratings available
Italy	Deliveroo	Deliveroo / Worker	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2023	The Court of Appeal of Milan has decided in favour of the employee status of a Deliveroo rider.	No ratings available
Italy	Glovo	Glovo / Workers	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2022	Milan’s Labour Court ordered Glovo to reintegrate a rider that had been disconnected and to give him an employment contract.	No ratings available
Italy	Foodinho (Glovo)	Francia Enrico / Foodinho (Glovo)	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2022	The Labour Section of the Turin Court recognised the rider Enrico Francia the application of the National Collective Agreement for Tertiary, Distribution, and Services as a consequence of his employment relationship with Foodinho (Glovo).	No ratings available
Italy	Foodinho (Glovo)	Tuttolomondo Marco/ Foodinho (Glovo)	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2020	An employment relationship exists between Foodinho and the rider making the recourse.	No ratings available
Italy	Foodora	Foodora / Riders	Ruled against workers	Yes - Self-employed status (with benefits)	2018	The Court recognized Foodora riders as independent contractors. In 2019, the Court of Appeal confirmed the ruling. Nonetheless, they should have some benefits: the labor law should classify their job as between salaried and independent work. Foodora appealed. In 2023, the Court of Cassation rejected the appeal.	No ratings available
Kenya	Uber	Uber / Kanuri Limited & 34 others	Ruled in favour of workers	No	2021	In 2016, Uber claimed that the group of 34 drivers had not entered into contracts with them but had done so with Uber BV in Amsterdam. In 2021, the High Court of Kenya concluded that all disputes had to be settled locally. In 2022, Uber has appealed to Kenya’s apex court.	2 Fairwork Ratings
Mexico	Uber		Ruled against workers	No - Business authorisation	2023	Two judges in the Federal court in Quintana Roo ruled that Uber could legally operate in Cancun without the same licenses and permits that taxi drivers must have.	0 Fairwork Ratings
Netherlands	Deliveroo	DELIVEROO NETHERLANDS B.V., / FEDERATIE NEDERLANDSE VAKBEWEGING (FNV)	Ruled in favour of workers	No - Collective agreement	2023	The sectoral collective agreement and pension fund for logistics applies to the company's riders.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Ola Cabs	OLA NETHERLANDS B.V. / [appellant sub 1] [appellant sub 2] [appellant sub 3]	Ruled in favour of workers	No	2023	Three drivers were denied access to their personal data. Ola Cabs was ordered to disclose meaningful information about the use in automated decision-making of worker earnings profiles and scores.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Uber	UBER B.V. / [appellant sub 1] [appellant sub 2] [appellant sub 3] [appellant sub 4] [appellant sub 5] [appellant sub 6]	Ruled in favour of workers	No	2023	The court found that six drivers had been robo-fired by Uber without appeal. 'There was thus insufficient evidence of actual human intervention.”	No ratings available
Netherlands	Uber	UBER B.V. / [appellant sub 1] [appellant sub 2] [appellant sub 3] [appellant sub 4]	Ruled in favour of workers	No	2023	The court ordered that Uber must explain how driver personal data and profiling are used in Uber’s upfront, dynamic pay and pricing system. On October 6, 2023, the District Court of Amsterdam ordered Uber to pay €584,000 in penalties for failure to comply with the court order for algorithmic transparency.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Deliveroo	Deliveroo Netherlands B.V. / Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee Status	2023	The agreements between Deliveroo and its couriers qualify as employment contracts.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Uber	DELIVEROO NETHERLANDS B.V., / FEDERATIE NEDERLANDSE VAKBEWEGING			2022	The decision of 13 September 2021 is suspended.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Uber	Uber / Staat der Nederlanden	Ruled in favour of workers	No	2022	The decision to declare the Taxi Transport CBA generally binding was valid.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Deliveroo	DELIVEROO NETHERLANDS B.V., / FEDERATIE NEDERLANDSE VAKBEWEGING (FNV)	Ruled in favour of workers	No	2021	Deliveroo falls under the generally binding collective labour agreement for Professional Freight Transport.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Helpling	HELPLING NETHERLANDS B.V., / FEDERATIE NEDERLANDSE VAKBEWEGING and [appellante sub 2]	Ruled against workers	Yes - Employee status	2021	The collective labour agreement for cleaning work is not applicable. A temporary employment agreement exists between the digital platform Helpling and its cleaners because the households structurally employ them.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Uber	Uber B.V. / Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2021	The Taxi Transport Collective Labour Agreement (CAO Taxivervoer) covers Uber drivers. The legal relationship between Uber and these drivers meets all the characteristics of an employment contract.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Ola	OLA NETHERLANDS B.V. / [verzoeker 1], [verzoeker 2], [verzoeker 3]	Ruled in favour of workers	No - Data access	2021	Ola must provide access to drivers' personal data.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Uber	UBER B.V. / [verzoeker 1], [verzoeker 2], [verzoeker 3], [verzoeker 4], [verzoeker 5], [verzoeker 6], [verzoeker 7], [verzoeker 8], [verzoeker 9], [verzoeker 10]	Ruled in favour of workers	No - Data access	2021	Uber must provide access to drivers' personal data.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Uber	UBER B.V. / [eiser 6]	Ruled in favour of workers	No - Unfair dismissals by the algorithm	2021	The Amsterdam District Court has ordered Uber to reinstate five UK drivers and one Dutch driver and pay compensation after they were unlawfully dismissed by algorithmic means.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Deliveroo	DELIVEROO NETHERLANDS B.V. / FEDERATIE NEDERLANDSE VAKBEWEGING	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2021	Deliveroo riders are not self-employed, but work for the company on the basis of an employment contract.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Deliveroo	Deliveroo Netherlands B.V. / Stichting Bedrijfstakpensioenfonds voor het Beroepsvervoer over de weg	Ruled in favour of workers	No - Pension fund	2019	Deliveroo is obliged to participate in the industry-wide pension fund for professional road transport.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Helpling	Helpling Netherlands B.V. / Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging	Ruled against workers	Yes - Self-employed status	2019	There is no employment relationship between Helpling and its cleaners.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Deliveroo	Deliveroo Netherlands B.V. / Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging	Ruled in favour of workers	No - collective agreement	2019	Deliveroo falls under the scope of the provisions of the Collective Labour Agreement for Professional Transport of Goods.	No ratings available
Netherlands	Deliveroo	Deliveroo Netherlands B.V / Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2019	The relationship between Deliveroo and its drivers still qualified as an employment contract	No ratings available
Netherlands	Deliveroo	DELIVEROO NETHERLANDS B.V., / [eiser]	Ruled against workers	Yes - Self-employed status	2018	The Court of Amsterdam ruled that the agreement that a rider entered into with Deliveroo does not count as an employment contract.	No ratings available
New Zealand	E Tu Inc & Anor v Rasier Operations Bv & Ors	E Tu Inc & Anor v Rasier Operations Bv & Ors	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2022	Four drivers were found to be employees of Uber.	No ratings available
New Zealand	Rasier New Zealand Ltd & Uber BV	Rasier New Zealand Ltd & Uber BV / Arachchige	Ruled against workers	Yes - Self-employed status	2020	The Employment Court ruled against the classification of the complainant as an employee of Uber.	No ratings available
Nigeria	Uber	Cheick Ouedraogo v. Uber Technologies System Nigeria Ltd & 2 Ors	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2022	The court ordered Uber to pay damages to 'ex-employee' over workplace harassment, victimization, and wrongful termination of employment. The Court also affirmed the principle of co-employer liability in employment relations.	0 Fairwork Ratings
Nigeria	Uber	Oladapo Olatunji and Daniel John (Representing themselves and other Uber and Taxify Drivers) v. Uber Technologies System Nigeria Limited & Taxify Technology Nigeria Limited	Ruled against workers	Yes - Self-employed status	2018	The claimants argued that the drivers working for Uber are employees. The court dismissed the case as the claimants could not prove their case.	0 Fairwork Ratings
Philippines	foodpanda	foodpanda / Davao United Delivery Riders Association Inc. (DUDRAI)	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Self-employed status	2022	The National Labor Relations Commission stated that foodpanda illegally dismissed riders who were regular employees.	0 Fairwork Ratings
Philippines	Grab	Grab / Smith&Williamson, independent monitoring trustee	Ruled in favour of workers	No	2019	The Phillippine Competition Commission fined Grab. Notably, the fine could not be passed on to the riders or customers of the service.	3 Fairwork Ratings
Portugal	Glovo	Glovo /Rider	No agreement reached	Yes	2023	Glovo did not reach an agreement with another courier demanding to be recognized as a dependent worker.	No ratings available
Portugal	Glovo	Glovo /Rider	No agreement reached	Yes	2023	A courier filed a lawsuit before the Labor Court of Port to claim the formalization of an employment contract.	No ratings available
South Africa	Uber	Uber South Africa Technology Services (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Public Service and Allied Workers (NUPSAW) and Others	Ruled against workers		2018	Drivers of Uber SA are not employees of Uber SA. Uber SA and Uber BV, established in the Netherlands, are separate legal entities.	2 Fairwork Ratings
Spain	Stuart	Stuart / Juzgado de lo Social número 18 de Barcelona	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2024	Stuart has been ordered to pay 237,000 euros to the General Social Security Fund for the contributions of 108 delivery workers.
Spain	Glovo	Amazon / Juzgado de lo Social número 42 de Madrid	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2024	Madrid's Social Court number 42 has condemned Amazon for hiring 3,688 delivery workers as false self-employed workers between October 2019 and November 2021.	No ratings available
Spain	Glovo	Glovo / Juzgado de lo Social número 4 de Madrid	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2023	The Social Court number 4 of Madrid recognized an employment relationship between Glovo and 280 riders in Murcia and Cartagena.	No ratings available
Spain	Clintu Online S.L.com	Clintu / Juzgado de lo social número 15 de Barcelona	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2023	The Social Court, n.º15 of Barcelona, upheld the claim presented by the General Treasury of Social Security against the cleaning service platform Clintu Online S.L.com, recognizing 505 workers as employees.	No ratings available
Spain	Ride-hailing platforms	Platforms / CJEU	Ruled against companies	No	2023	The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) concludes that the limitation of one license for Transport Vehicles with a Driver (VTC) for every 30 taxis goes against the law of the European Union.	No ratings available
Spain	Glovo	Glovo / Inspección de Trabajo y Seguridad Social Madrid	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2023	The Labour and Social Security Inspectorate in Madrid proposed a penalty of €57 million on delivery company Glovo for false classification of self-employed workers and illegal employment of migrant workers.	No ratings available
Spain	Glovo	Glovo / Riders (Juzgado de lo Social nº 1 de Pamplona)	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2022	The Social Court of Pamplona declared that there was an employment relationship between 207 Glovo riders and the company itself from October 2018 to August 2019. Glovo appealed against the ruling, but in September 2023, the court rejected the appeal.	No ratings available
Spain	Glovo	Glovo App 23 / Riders	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2022	The Social Court number 3 of Córdoba recognized riders as employees, not self-employed workers.	No ratings available
Spain	Glovo	Glovo / J.Parrado	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2021	Glovo unjustifiably disconnected the rider's account without prior notice. The ruling condemned Glovo for unfair dismissal to compensate him with 3,349 euros.	No ratings available
Spain	Portier Eats Spain S.L	Portier Eats Spain / FeSMC-UGT and CCOO	Ruled in favour of workers	No	2021	After the collective dismissal of more than 4,000 Uber delivery drivers, Portier Eats Spain must pay each affected rider 45 days' salary per year of service, with minimum compensation, depending on seniority and the remuneration received in the last year.	No ratings available
Spain	Deliveroo	Juzgado de lo Social nº 24 de Barcelona	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2021	The Barcelona Court ruled that Deliveroo riders should be considered employees rather than independent contractors.	No ratings available
Spain	Deliveroo	Roofoods Spain S.L. / TRESORERIA GENERAL DE LA SEGURETAT SOCIAL	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2020	The Social Court No. 24 of Barcelona determined that 748 Deliveroo riders operated as false self-employed and recognized the employment relationship between the riders and the company.	No ratings available
Spain	Glovo	TRIBUNAL SUPREMO (Recurso de casación para la unificación de doctrina)	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2020	The High Court declared the existence of an employment relationship between Glovo and a delivery driver.	No ratings available
Spain	Deliveroo	ROOFOODS SPAIN SL (DELIVEROO) / FONS DE GARANTIA SALARIAL (FOGASA)	Ruled in favour of workers	No	2019	The court declared the existence of a violation of fundamental rights in the company's conduct to terminate a group of workers' contracts.	No ratings available
Spain	Deliveroo	TESORERÍA GENERAL DE LA SEGURIDAD SOCIAL / ROODFOODS SPAIN S	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2019	The Valencia court ruled that Deliveroo wrongly hired 97 riders as self-employed contractors instead of regular workers.	No ratings available
United Kingdom (the)	Deliveroo	IWGB / Central Arbitration Committee and another	Ruled against workers	Yes - Self-employed status	2023	The Supreme Court has ruled that Deliveroo riders do not have the right to collective negotiations on pay and conditions because they are ‘self-employed’.	3 Fairwork Ratings
United Kingdom (the)	Uber	UBER BRITANNIA LIMITED v. SEFTON METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL	Ruled in favour of workers	No	2023	Uber sued Sefton Council in Merseyside over VAT terms for operators outside London. Currently, private hire operators do not pay VAT as the individual drivers are usually classed as independent, self-employed contractors. On July 28, the High Court confirmed that a passenger entered into a contract of hire with the minicab operator, not the driver. “A properly regulated and remunerated pool of drivers benefits public safety.	4 Fairwork Ratings
United Kingdom (the)	Uber	Uber B.V and others vs Aslam and others	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2021	The UK Supreme Court has ruled that Uber drivers should be classed as workers with access to minimum wage and paid holidays.	4 Fairwork Ratings
United Kingdom (the)	City Sprint	City Sprint UK Ltd / London South Employment Tribunal	Ruled in favour of workers	No - Holiday pay	2020	The cycle couriers were workers both before and after the new contract they had to sign in 2017 and therefore have a claim to holiday pay.	No ratings available
United Kingdom (the)	City Sprint	City Sprint & Revisecatch / Dewhurst	Ruled in favour of workers	Transfer of undertakings	2019	Gig economy workers are protected under TUPE (Transfer of Undertaking Protection of Employment) regulations. Under TUPE, 'employees' are entitled to maintain the same level of protection and rights that they had prior to the transfer in case of a transferring business/service contract to a new owner/contractor.	No ratings available
United Kingdom (the)	Addison Lee Limited	Addison Lee Limited/ (1) MR M LANGE (2) MR M OLSZEWSKI (3) MR M MORAHAN	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2018	Drivers are considered employees under the Working Time Regulations 1998 and the National Minimum Wage 1998.	No ratings available
United Kingdom (the)	Hermes	Hermes / GMB	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2018	An employment tribunal found that a group of 65 Hermes couriers are workers, not self-employed.	No ratings available
United States (the)	Amazon	Amazon / Amazon drivers	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2024	The Wisconsin Supreme Court has ruled that Amazon Flex delivery drivers are employees.
United States (the)	DoorDash, Grubhub, Uber	Food delivery companies / riders	Ruled in favour of workers	No - Minimum pay	2023	The judge, Nicholas Moyne, said New York City regulators could raise minimum wages for app-based food delivery workers.	0 US Ratings
United States (the)	Uber	Uber / Erik Adolph	Ruled in favour of workers	No - Right to sue	2023	The California Supreme Court allowed workers to sue for labor law violations on the state’s behalf.	0 US Ratings
United States (the)	Ride-hailing and food delivery companies	Ride-hailing and food delivery companies / The State of California	Ruled against workers	Yes - Self-employed status	2023	A California appeal court reversed a lower-court ruling that found Proposition 22 to be illegal.	0 US Ratings
United States (the)	Uber	Uber / The State of California	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2020	A California appeal court said Uber and Lyft must classify their drivers as employees.	0 US Ratings
United States (the)	Lyft	Lyft / The State of California	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes - Employee status	2020	A California appeal court said Uber and Lyft must classify their drivers as employees.	0 US Ratings
United States (the)	Dynamex	Dynamex / Charles Lee et al.	Ruled in favour of workers	Yes	2018	California’s Supreme Court set a strict new standard that made it harder for companies to classify workers as independent contractors.	0 US Ratings

A note to the reader: This dataset is only intended to provide a flavour of the court case ruling. We suggest you go through the details provided in the links, if you wish to know more about a particular case.

Legenda:

1 - Country: country or jusridiction where case in question was filed

2- Platform

3- Associated Parties: party 1 vs party 2

4 - Ruling status: (1) ruling in court/progress (2) ruled against workers (3) ruled in favour of workers

5 - Ruling in favour of self-employed status or employee status

6 - Ruling date wherever applicable

7 - Summary: a maximum two line summary of the case

8 - Ratings: score of associated platform (if it exists) with a link to the ratings page on the Fairwork website

Country

Platform

Associated Parties

Ruling Status

Ruling in favour of self-employed status or employee status

Ruling Date

Summary

Platform Fairwork Score