ILR Bulletin, Vol 11 2007
23 August 2007

Print this page

CLJ Law MALAYSIA http://www.cljlaw.com

Introduction:
To get the most out of this law bulletin join CLJ Law Online now - http://www.cljlaw.com/registration.asp
Feel free to forward this to your colleagues. Get this bulletin as email by going to http://www.cljlaw.com/ilrsubscribefrm.asp

INDUSTRIAL LAW REPORTS ISSUE 7 of 2007

SUBJECT INDEX

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Dismissal - Industrial Court - Decision - Upholding dismissal - Whether unreasonable - Whether irrational warranting court’s intervention - Whether punishment meted out disproportionate
Abu Samah Othman v. Oriental Assemblers Sdn Bhd
(Syed Ahmad Helmy J)
[Judicial Court No: [MT-1] 25-39-2005] [2007] 3 ILR 1

Remedies - Certiorari - Application for certiorari to quash award of Industrial Court - Whether IC’s finding tainted with unreasonableness - Whether decision irrational warranting court’s intervention - Whether punishment meted out disproportionate
Abu Samah Othman v. Oriental Assemblers Sdn Bhd
(Syed Ahmad Helmy J)
[Judicial Court No: [MT-1] 25-39-2005] [2007] 3 ILR 1

Breach of company rules and policies - Negligence/ Carelessness - No action taken against other employees who had been involved in transaction - Whether constituted a violation of settled principles of industrial law - 3 month gap between the two set of charges claimant was accused of - Whether amounted to condonation by the company - Effect of - Whether company had managed to prove allegations against the claimant - Quality of company’s evidence - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Southern Finance Company Berhad v. Kamarudin Basri
(Sauffee Afandi Mohamad) [2007] 3 ILR 90

Constructive dismissal - Benefits - Commission payments allegedly due to the claimant - Whether proven - No protest made by claimant for almost 1 1/2 years - Claimant claiming constructive dismissal - Whether constructive dismissal proven - Whether the claimant waived the alleged breach by the company - Whether fundamental breach of terms of employment by company - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Konti Iss (M) Sdn Bhd v. Ng Heok Chuan
(Amelia Tee Hong Geok Abdullah) [2007] 3 ILR 150

Insubordination - Claimant allegedly refusing to work on Sundays - Not stated in the company’s termination letter or Statement in Reply - Effect of - Whether that ground should be taken into consideration by the Industrial Court in determining if dismissal was with just cause and excuse - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
P Iswaran Perumal v. Proston Industry Sdn Bhd
(Yamuna Menon) [2007] 3 ILR 194

Misconduct - Claimant absenting himself from workplace - Whether proven by the company on a balance of probabilities - Whether the allegations levelled against the claimant condescended on cogent particulars - Show cause letter stipulating only one misconduct - Whether claimant’s reply to the show cause letter was assessed fairly - Whether companies own views coloured their decision to terminate the claimant - At hearing in Court, other allegations of misconduct brought up - Whether practise should be allowed - Whether other misconducts canvassed in Court were mere afterthoughts - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Krismas Aknee v. Oricon Sdn Bhd
(Muniandy Kannyappan) [2007] 3 ILR 55

Misconduct - Claimant allegedly failing to attend company’s monthly meetings - No warnings issued to claimant - Whether proven - Conduct of company after the event - Whether company had waived or condoned claimant’s conduct - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 2 & 20(3)
Hillcity Restaurant Sdn Bhd v. Hon Loke Ching
(Choong Siew Khim) [2007] 3 ILR 132

Misconduct - Claimant showing a bad attitude towards his superior - Whether proven - Company conducting inquiry with just two people being present - Effect of - Claimant being advised of charges against him verbally - Claimant issued a warning letter - Subsequently claimant being terminated from his services - Whether amounted to double punishment over the same incident - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Aoba Technology (M) Sdn Bhd v. Tan Kian Wooi
(Zura Yahya) [2007] 3 ILR 225

Misconduct - Sexual harassment by claimant on colleague - Whether proven - Claimant cautioned by superiors and given warnings - Failing to heed - Claimant hurting complainant physically - Effect of - Complainant lodging police report - Claimant raising technicalities by way of defence - How to be dealt with by Industrial Court - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Sistem Televisyen Malaysia Bhd v. Baharum Abu Baker
(Sauffee Afandi Mohamad) 70

Misconduct - Whether the punishment of dismissal was too harsh under circumstances - Other modes of punishment provided in claimant’s terms and conditions of service - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Krismas Aknee v. Oricon Sdn Bhd
(Muniandy Kannyappan) [2007] 3 ILR 55

Notice of termination - Forced resignation - Termination agreement signed between claimant and company - Whether claimant coerced to sign termination agreement - Whether proven - Conduct of claimant - Whether claimant had been dismissed without just cause and excuse by the company - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Siemens Malaysia Sdn. Bhd. v. Abdul Samad Yusof
(Soo Ai Lin) [2007] 3 ILR 203

Notice of termination - Mutual termination - Whether proven - How the VSS Scheme was formulated - Whether clause in VSS was draconion - Whether clause was unilateral - Whether proven - Effect of - Company not giving reasons for rejection of claimants withdrawal - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Thilagavathy SR Canagasingam v. Am Bank (M) Berhad
(Rajendran Nayagam) [2007] 3 ILR 215

Notice of termination - Mutual termination - Whether voluntary - Claimant accepting the VSS Scheme - State of mind of claimant when accepting the VSS Scheme - Claimant subsequently attempting to withdraw from VSS Scheme - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Thilagavathy SR Canagasingam v. Am Bank (M) Berhad
(Rajendran Nayagam) [2007] 3 ILR 215

Notice of termination allegedly given by the company - Claimant failing to adduce documentary proof - Effect of - Whether claimant had actually been dismissed - Whether constructive dismissal or whether claimant had walked out of his employment - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Konti Iss (M) Sdn Bhd v. Ng Heok Chuan
(Amelia Tee Hong Geok Abdullah) [2007] 3 ILR 150

Performance - Poor performance - Whether company had succeeded in proving - Company had re-employed claimant after she had resigned - No warnings issued to the claimant - Company documents indicating that claimant was a good performer - Explanation rendered by claimant on allegations against her - Whether reasonable - Whether company’s actions harsh and unconscionable - Whether proven - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
ZG Nan Fang Holidays (M) Sdn Bhd v. Ching Pei Ling
(Chew Soo Ho) [2007] 3 ILR 103

Performance - Unsatisfactory performance of claimant - Claimant issued a warning letter - Conduct of claimant thereafter - Whether company had proven unsatisfactory performance of claimant - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Konti Iss (M) Sdn Bhd v. Ng Heok Chuan
(Amelia Tee Hong Geok Abdullah) [2007] 3 ILR 150

Performance - Unsatisfactory performance - Company undergoing financial problems - Whether proven - Claimant being asked to improve financial status of company - Claimant failing to deliver - Failure of claimant resulting in retrenchment of company employees - Company suffering financially - Dismissal of claimant pursuant to contract - Company unable to survive anymore due to claimant’s failure to turn company around - Whether there was victimization on the part of the company in dismissing the claimant - Whether the company’s actions had been bona fide - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Harom LPG Industries Sdn Bhd v. Yeoh Poe Kee
(Sauffee Afandi Mohamad) [2007] 3 ILR 188

Poor performance - No letter of appointment issued to claimant - Whether sufficient evidence adduced by company to prove the same - Whether allegations proven - Warnings letters issued to the claimant within days of each other - Whether claimant had been given sufficient opportunity to improve performance - Termination took place two days after last warning letter issued - Whether termination done in haste - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
P Iswaran Perumal v. Proston Industry Sdn Bhd
(Yamuna Menon) [2007] 3 ILR 194

Poor performance - One of the grounds stated in the termination letter - Contradicted by company vide witness statements - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Aoba Technology (M) Sdn Bhd v. Tan Kian Wooi
(Zura Yahya) [2007] 3 ILR 225

Retrenchment - Insolvency - Company under receivership - Company complying with terms of employment contract re dismissal - Claimants paid compensation in lieu of notice - Claimants failing to adduce evidence to show that their dismissal had been without just cause and excuse - Effect of - What would have happened if claimants had been able to show that their dismissal had been without just cause and excuse - Does contractual term supersede equity and natural justice - Whether company’s actions in dismissing claimants bona fide - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Abdul Wahid Abdul Said & Ors v. Rindaya Wood Processing Sdn Bhd (Receivers And Managers Appointed)
(Muniandy Kannyappan) [2007] 3 ILR 179

Procedural impropriety - Whether claimant had been aware of charges brought against him - Whether the evidence had been hidden from him - Whether claimant had been given opportunity to cross-examine witnesses - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Sistem Televisyen Malaysia Bhd v. Baharum Abu Baker
(Sauffee Afandi Mohamad) [2007] 3 ILR 70

Adverse inference - Non-production of material witness - Individuals directly involved in transaction not called by company to give evidence - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Evidence Act 1950 s. 114(g)
Southern Finance Company Berhad v. Kamarudin Basri
(Sauffee Afandi Mohamad) [2007] 3 ILR 90

Burden of proof - Who bears - Whether it can be shifted to claimant - Onus of proof - Who bears - Whether company had satisfied requisite burden - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
ZG Nan Fang Holidays (M) Sdn Bhd v. Ching Pei Ling
(Chew Soo Ho) [2007] 3 ILR 103

Corroboration - Sexual harassment and threats to life - Usage of vulgar language - Independently corroborated by numerous witnesses - As against claimant’s bare denial - Effect of - Whether misconducts had been proven - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Sistem Televisyen Malaysia Bhd v. Baharum Abu Baker
(Sauffee Afandi Mohamad) [2007] 3 ILR 70

Standard of proof - Not a criminal case - On a balance of probabilities - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Sistem Televisyen Malaysia Bhd v. Baharum Abu Baker
(Sauffee Afandi Mohamad) 70

Witnesses - Conflicting evidence - One parties word against the other - How viewed - Company witnesses version lacking documentary evidence or flying in the face of company documents - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
ZG Nan Fang Holidays (M) Sdn Bhd v. Ching Pei Ling
(Chew Soo Ho) [2007] 3 ILR 103

Witness - Conflicting evidence - Whose version was most probable - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Hillcity Restaurant Sdn Bhd v. Hon Loke Ching
(Choong Siew Khim) [2007] 3 ILR 132

Procedure - Action - Preliminary objection - Union using wrong section of Industrial Relations Act 1967 to bypass statutory regulations - Effect of - Whether should be allowed - Whether provisions relied on by Union misconceived - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 18 & 33
British American Tobacco (M) Bhd, Employees Union v. British American Tobacco (Malaysia) Bhd
(Syed Ahmad Radzi Syed Omar) [2007] 3 ILR 128

Remedies - Claimant with company for approximately four months - Best form of compensation - Discretion of the Court - Global Sum - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 30(5)
P Iswaran Perumal v. Proston Industry Sdn Bhd
(Yamuna Menon) [2007] 3 ILR 194

Remedies - Whether reinstatement suitable - Backwages - Deductions made for the contributory conduct of the claimant - Whether relationship of trust and confidence between the parties had broken down - Contributory conduct of the claimant - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Krismas Aknee v. Oricon Sdn Bhd
(Muniandy Kannyappan) [2007] 3 ILR 55

Employment - Dismissal - Alleged offence - Disrupting superior’s instructions - Use of harsh and insulting words on supervisor - Whether proved - Whether dismissal justified
Abu Samah Othman v. Oriental Assemblers Sdn Bhd
(Syed Ahmad Helmy J)
[Judicial Court No: [MT-1] 25-39-2005] [2007] 3 ILR 1

Employment - Dismissal - Whether punishment of dismissal proportionate to alleged offence
Abu Samah Othman v. Oriental Assemblers Sdn Bhd
(Syed Ahmad Helmy J)
[Judicial Court No: [MT-1] 25-39-2005] [2007] 3 ILR 1

Industrial Court - Decision - Upholding dismissal - Whether unreasonable - Whether decision irrational warranting court’s intervention - Whether punishment meted out disproportionate
Abu Samah Othman v. Oriental Assemblers Sdn Bhd
(Syed Ahmad Helmy J)
[Judicial Court No: [MT-1] 25-39-2005] [2007] 3 ILR 1

Collective Agreement - Matter not referred by Minister - Whether Industrial Court could adjudicate under such circumstances - Correct procedure for matters relating to a dispute of facts - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 18 & 33
British American Tobacco (M) Bhd, Employees Union v. British American Tobacco (Malaysia) Bhd
(Syed Ahmad Radzi Syed Omar) [2007] 3 ILR 128

Pelaksanaan tanggungjawab - Tidak memuaskan - Samada pertuduhan-pertuduhan telah dibuktikan oleh responden - Kelakuan Pihak Menuntut - Kesannya - Samada pembuangan kerja Pihak Menuntut dilakukan tanpa sebab atau alasan yang munasabah - Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, s. 20(3)
Kwok Kim Teck lwn. Palmco Holdings Berhad
(Siti Khadijah Sheikh Hassan) [2007] 3 ILR 138

Pelaksanaan tanggungjawab - Tidak memuaskan - Tiada surat amaran diberikan kepada Pihak Menuntut - Samada responden diwajibkan memberikan surat amaran kepada Pihak Menuntut - Jawatan yang dipegang oleh Pihak Menuntut - Kesannya - Samada pembuangan kerja Pihak Menuntut dilakukan tanpa sebab atau alasan yang munasabah - Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, s. 20(3)
Kwok Kim Teck lwn. Palmco Holdings Berhad
(Siti Khadijah Sheikh Hassan) [2007] 3 ILR 138

Pengingkaran aturan dan polisi syarikat - Fraud - Yang Menuntut membuka baucer bayaran yang palsu - Pemalsuan tandatangan - Pakar tandatangan tidak dipanggil - Kesannya - Baucer bayaran yang palsu itu membenarkan bayaran dibuat kepada syarikat dimana Yang Menuntut dahulunya merupakan seorang pengarah - Syarikat tidak mempunyai pengetahuan mengenai hubungan Yang Menuntut dengan syarikat ketiga tersebut - Kesannya - Samada pembuangan kerja Yang Menuntut sah di sisi undang-undang - Samada pembuangan kerja Yang Menuntut dilakukan tanpa sebab atau alasan yang munasabah - Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Petronas Carigali Sdn Bhd lwn. Kalik Hashim
(Mohd Amin Firdaus Abdullah) [2007] 3 ILR 7

Pengingkaran aturan dan polisi syarikat - Kecuaian Yang Menuntut - Pengeluaran wang responden berlebihan daripada jumlah yang dinyatakan di dalam kontrak - Yang Menuntut mengabaikan prosidur responden - Ramai pegawai atasan lain juga turut terlibat dalam pengabaian prosidur responden - Kesannya - Samada Yang Menuntut mempunyai pengetahuan - Samada Yang Menuntut membantu salahlaku pegawai atasannya daripada dikesan - Samada salahlaku pegawai atasannya berunsur jenayah - Samada Yang Menuntut mendapat manfaat daripada salahlaku tersebut - Kesannya - Samada Yang Menuntut harus menurut arahan pegawai atasannya dimana tindakannya mempunyai unsur jenayah - Samada pertuduhan terhadap Yang Menuntut dibuktikan - Jikapun dibukikan samada salahlaku tersebut mewajarkan Yang Menuntut dipecat - Samada pembuangan kerja adalah tanpa alasan atau sebab yang adil - Akta Mahkamah Perusahaan 1967, s. 20(3)
White Horse Marketing Sdn Bhd lwn. Saw Kee Hiang
(Siti Khadijah Sheikh Hassan) [2007] 3 ILR 43

Ketiadaan - Kesannya - Samada merupakan suatu amalan perburuhan yang patut digalakkan - Samada pembuangan kerja Pihak Menuntut dilakukan tanpa sebab atau alasan yang munasabah - Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, s. 20(3)
Kwok Kim Teck lwn. Palmco Holdings Berhad
(Siti Khadijah Sheikh Hassan) [2007] 3 ILR 138

CASE OF THE WEEK

LAM HO ENTERPRISE SDN BHD v. TAN KAH CHAI

DISMISSAL: Misconduct - Claimant allegedly refusing to obey transfer order - Claimant asking for more time before transfer effected - Whether respondent company had condoned claimant’s request - Conduct of respondent company - Effect of - Whether company had acted bona fide - Insufficient proof adduced by company - Effect of - Whether dismissal was without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)

ILR Bulletin
To Subscribe/Unsubscribe go to http://www.cljlaw.com/ilrsubscribefrm.asp

Copyright ©1997 - 2007 CLJ Legal Network Sdn Bhd (192353 V)
Email: enquiries@cljlaw.com Phone: 603-4270-5400 Fax No : 603-4270 5401 & 603-4270 5402