ILR Bulletin, Vol 1 2007
December 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 1 of 2008

Breach of company rules and policies - Negligence - Scope of claimant’s duties - Whether claimant had delegated his duties - Claimant failing to comply with company directives - Effect of - Which document had set out the scope of the claimant’s duties - Whether the claimant had been aware of the amount of monies collected - Whether the company had managed to establish the misconduct against the claimant - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Keretapi Tanah Melayu Bhd v. Raja Gopal Murugesu
(Syed Ahmad Radzi Syed Omar) [2008] 1 ILR 200

Breach of company rules and policies - Negligence - Whether claimant had taken the money for his personal use - No evidence that claimant had taken the money - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Keretapi Tanah Melayu Bhd v. Raja Gopal Murugesu
(Syed Ahmad Radzi Syed Omar) [2008] 1 ILR 200

Constructive dismissal - Abandonment of job - Whether claimant had abandoned her job - Contents of contemporaneous documents - Effect of - No formal inquiry conducted - Intention of company - Whether mala fide - Whether fundamental breach of terms of employment - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
BASF (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd v. Tan Pooi Gaik
(Sauffee Afandi Mohamad) [2008] 1 ILR 29

Constructive dismissal - Change in job functions - Claimant undischarged bankrupt at point in time of appointment - Non-disclosure by claimant - Effect of - Whether claimant had duty to disclose - Letter of appointment silent on matter - Bankruptcy subsequently annulled - Effect of - Whether claimant’s appointment voidable - Another director also undischarged bankrupt - No action taken against him - Whether constructive dismissal proven - Whether fundamental breach of terms of employment - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(1) & 20(3), Companies Act 1965, s. 125(1), Contracts Act 1950, s. 24 & Bankruptcy Act 1967, s. 38(1)(d)
Sanergy Marine Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Ignatius Peter M Govind
(Franklin Goonting) [2008] 1 ILR 160

Constructive dismissal - Change in job functions - Claimant undischarged bankrupt at point in time of appointment - Respondent revoking then re-affirming and subsequently revoking claimant’s appointment - Effect of - Whether constructive dismissal proven - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(1) & 20(3)
Sanergy Marine Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Ignatius Peter M Govind
(Franklin Goonting) [2008] 1 ILR 160

Constructive dismissal - Change in salary - Claimant took 40 days before claiming constructive dismissal - Effect of - Whether constituted condonation on part of claimant - Reasons given by claimant for delay - Conduct of company - Whether the company had come to court with clean hands - Whether Fundamental Breach of Terms of Employment - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(1) & 20(3), Companies Act 1965 s. 125(1), Contracts Act 1950 s. 24 & Bankruptcy Act 1967 ss. 38(1)(d), 52 & 53
Sanergy Marine Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Ignatius Peter M Govind
(Franklin Goonting) [2008] 1 ILR 160

Constructive dismissal - Change in job function - Whether temporary re-designation - Whether claimant had agreed to new position - Whether demotion in position - Salary and terms of conditions of employment unchanged - Whether constructive dismissal proven - Effect of - Whether fundamental breach of terms of employment - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(1) & 20(3)
Natseven TV Sdn Bhd v. Chan Siew Wah
(Sauffee Afandi Mohamad) [2008] 1 ILR 62

Constructive dismissal - Claimant accused of sexual misconduct - Claimant found guilty of charge and demoted in position - Loss in salary due to deprivation of allowances and fringe benefits - Basic salary remained the same - Whether constructive dismissal proven - Claimant working under protest for 2 years - Effect of - Whether constituted condonation on part of claimant - Conduct of company - Whether the company had come to court with clean hands - Whether Fundamental Breach of Terms of Employment - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(1) & 20(3)
wang Madohi Awang Sulaiman v. Bintulu Port Sdn Bhd
(Muniandy Kannyappan) [2008] 1 ILR 76

Constructive dismissal - Salary - Claimant carrying on to work despite breach for 8 months - Whether constituted condonation - Effect of - Whether fundamental breach of terms of employment - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(1) & 20(3)
Asia Pacific Auction Centre Sdn Bhd v. Chan Sow Foon
(Franklin Goonting) [2008] 1 ILR 100

Constructive dismissal - Salary - Claimant’s salary unilaterally reduced - Lack of documentation in support of claimant’s higher salary - Claimant’s immediate superior supporting her increase in salary in writing - Whether constructive dismissal proven - Conduct of company - Whether fundamental breach of terms of employment - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(1) & 20(3)
Asia Pacific Auction Centre Sdn Bhd v. Chan Sow Foon
(Franklin Goonting) [2008] 1 ILR 100

Constructive dismissal - Salary and statutory contributions - Delay in payment - Whether it amounted to breach that was so fundamental it went to the root of the contract - Claimant walking out of employment - Claimant claiming constructive dismissal - Whether constructive dismissal proven - Whether claimant had abandoned his job - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Sama World Asia Sdn Bhd v. Teh Soo Seng
(Tan Yeak Hui) [2008] 1 ILR 112

Constructive dismissal - Salary and statutory contributions - Delay in payment - Whether the company had evinced an intention no longer to be bound by contract - Victimization and mala fide not pleaded - Whether claimant had been aware of financial situation of the company - Company subsequently paying off all outstanding arrears to employees - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Sama World Asia Sdn Bhd v. Teh Soo Seng
(Tan Yeak Hui) [2008] 1 ILR 112

Constructive dismissal - Victimization of the claimant - Effect of - Conduct of company - Claimant effectively only given one choice by company - Whether mala fide - Whether claimant driven out of her employment - Whether fundamental breach of terms of employment - Whether justified claimant walking out of employment - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
BASF (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd v. Tan Pooi Gaik
(Sauffee Afandi Mohamad) [2008] 1 ILR 29

Misconduct - Claimant instigating staff to leave - Using racist remarks against company - Company incurring expenses in advertising for new staff - Effect of - Letter of appointment providing for punishment in event of misconduct - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3) & Employment Act 1955, s. 14(1)
Benvac Corporation Sdn Bhd v. Azhan Ahmad Pesar
(Yeoh Wee Siam) [2008] 1 ILR 125

Performance - Unsatisfactory performance - Claimant not turning up for work at customers premises - Claimant counselled and given warning letter by company - Failure to improve - Probationer claimant - Claimant not confirmed in his position - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Benvac Corporation Sdn Bhd v. Azhan Ahmad Pesar
(Yeoh Wee Siam) [2008] 1 ILR 125

Performance - Unsatisfactory performance - Oral evidence - No documentary evidence produced by company - Whether company had succeeded in proving - Whether the evaluation report had been brought to the claimant’s attention - Whether company’s actions mala fides - Whether proven - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Ruzaimi Rizal Arajami v. Tanjong Golden Village Sdn Bhd
(Fredrick Indran XA Nicholas) [2008] 1 ILR 15

Probationer - Claimant’s probation period extended - No documentary evidence to indicate why extended - Whether adverse inference should be drawn against the company - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967 s. 20(3) & Evidence Act 1950 s. 114(g)
Ruzaimi Rizal Arajami v. Tanjong Golden Village Sdn Bhd
(Fredrick Indran XA Nicholas) [2008] 1 ILR 15

Retrenchment - Redundancy - Claimant only person retrenched - LIFO principles - Whether applicable - Whether claimant was only person in job category - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Total Sports Asia Sdn Bhd v. Zakiah Abdul Hamid
(Siti Saleha Abu Bakar) [2008] 1 ILR 49

Retrenchment - Redundancy - Claimant not warned of impending retrenchment - Whether claimant should have been consulted and warned - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Total Sports Asia Sdn Bhd v. Zakiah Abdul Hamid
(Siti Saleha Abu Bakar) [2008] 1 ILR 49

Retrenchment - Redundancy - Claimant employed by two companies - Whether co-employers - Relationship between the two company’s - One of the respondent company’s wound-up - Whether respondent company had proven that a redundancy situation existed - Which company bore the burden of proving - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Pretech Sdn Bhd & Ors v. Ahmad Jafferil Ab Halim
(Soo Ai Lin) [2008] 1 ILR 194

Retrenchment - Redundancy - Dot.com bust - Whether company was facing real financial difficulties - Cost cutting measures taken by company - Effect of - Whether there was any mala fide intention on the part of the company - Whether a redundancy situation had existed - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Total Sports Asia Sdn Bhd v. Zakiah Abdul Hamid
(Siti Saleha Abu Bakar) [2008] 1 ILR 49

Procedural impropriety - Whether the procedure adopted had been flawed - Effect of - Whether claimant had suffered prejudice due to such flaws - Whether natural justice meted out - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Awang Madohi Awang Sulaiman v. Bintulu Port Sdn Bhd
(Muniandy Kannyappan) [2008] 1 ILR 76

Documentary evidence - Statutory declaration - Admissibility of - Statutory declaration executed by person overseas - Whether bringing that person down to give evidence was reasonable and cost effective - Extent to which contents of the statutory declaration was allowed - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3), 30(5) & Evidence Act 1950, s. 73A(3)
Mehran Omar v. Kyowa Kanko Kaihatsu (M) Sdn Bhd
(Yamuna Menon) [2008] 1 ILR 139

Witness - Credibility - Conflicting testimony - Effect of Evidence Act 1950
BASF (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd v. Tan Pooi Gaik
(Sauffee Afandi Mohamad) [2008] 1 ILR 29

Action - Setting aside of Award of co-ordinate jurisdiction - No reasons adduced for failure to comply with Court directions in oral application - Effect of - No definite period stipulated by applicant for compliance - Draft pleading not annexed as exhibit to application - Intention of applicant - Effect of - Where the fault lay - Whether res judicata was applicable - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 2, 26, 30(5), 30(9), 33(1), 33(2) & 56
Yeoh Liang Teik v. Coconut & Allied Products Sdn Bhd
(Chew Soo Ho) [2008] 1 ILR 234

Action - Setting aside of award - Whether reasons adduced proven - Effect of - Intent of the Industrial Relations Act 1967
Yeoh Liang Teik v. Coconut & Allied Products Sdn Bhd
(Chew Soo Ho) [2008] 1 ILR 234

Procedure - Action - Award handed down by another division of Industrial Court - Whether Court functus officio - Whether Court could set aside Award - Proper Recourse - Effect Of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 2, 26, 30(5), 30(9), 33(1), 33(2) & 56
Yeoh Liang Teik v. Coconut & Allied Products Sdn Bhd
(Chew Soo Ho) [2008] 1 ILR 234

Procedure - Action - Order - Whether order required to be perfected and extracted - Court of co-ordinate jurisdiction - Effect of - Whether Court functus officio - Whether Court could set aside Award - Proper Recourse - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 2, 26, 30(5), 30(9), 33(1), 33(2) & 56
Yeoh Liang Teik v. Coconut & Allied Products Sdn Bhd
(Chew Soo Ho) [2008] 1 ILR 234

Procedure - Action - Claimant commencing action in Magistrates Court for arrears of salary - Whether subsequent claim in Industrial Court attracted the doctrine of res judicata - Applicability of the doctrine - Industrial Relations Act 1967
Sama World Asia Sdn Bhd v. Teh Soo Seng
(Tan Yeak Hui) [2008] 1 ILR 112

Procedure - Action - Liability of parties - Whether SEC jointly liable to pay claimant - How determined - Whether SEC was de facto employer of claimant - Industrial Relations Act 1967
Sanergy Marine Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Ignatius Peter M Govind
(Franklin Goonting) [2008] 1 ILR 160

Procedure - Joinder - Whether director could be made a party to the proceedings - Whether directing mind of company - Factors to consider - Whether corporate veil of the company should be lifted - In what circumstances can it be lifted - Companies Act 1965
Ravi Chanthran Sithambaram v. Pelita Akademi Sdn Bhd
(Susila Sithamparam) [2008] 1 ILR 223

Procedure - Parties - Joinder - Whether application can be made in non-compliance proceedings - Whether respondent had financial means to satisfy the award - Whether respondent was insolvent - Balance sheet test - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 29(3) & Companies Act 1965 ss. 218, 218(2)(c)
Ravi Chanthran Sithambaram v. Pelita Akademi Sdn Bhd
(Susila Sithamparam) [2008] 1 ILR 223

Procedure - Reference to High Court - Whether the questions sought to be referred had arisen in the course of proceedings - Whether requirements of s. 33A of the IRA had been satisfied - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 30(5) & 33A
Berjaya Industrial Berhad & Anor v. Leong Shin Hyun
(Amelia Tee Hong Geok Abdullah) [2008] 1 ILR 148

Procedure - Reference to High Court - Application for judicial review filed in High Court and reference under s. 33A filed in Industrial Court - Whether amounted to duplicity of proceedings - Scope of s. 33A of the IRA - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967
Berjaya Industrial Berhad & Anor v. Leong Shin Hyun
(Amelia Tee Hong Geok Abdullah) [2008] 1 ILR 148

Remedies - Compensation - Basic salary remained the same - Claimant resigning - Whether entitled to reinstatement or compensation in lieu of reinstatement or backwages - Effect of claimant’s resignation - Industrial Relations Act 1967
Awang Madohi Awang Sulaiman v. Bintulu Port Sdn Bhd
(Muniandy Kannyappan) [2008] 1 ILR 76

Remedies - Compensation - Deduction for post dismissal earnings - Factors to take into account - Whether claimant had suffered hardship due to respondents actions - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967
Sanergy Marine Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Ignatius Peter M Govind
(Franklin Goonting) [2008] 1 ILR 160

Remedies - Compensation - Nominal damages - Concept of - Whether applicable under circumstances - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Aman Teguh - WICC JV Sdn Bhd v. Low Hock Meng
(Chew Soo Ho) [2008] 1 ILR 216

Remedies - Compensation - Probationer claimant - Claimant’s monthly package - How arrived at - Effect of - How calculated - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Ruzaimi Rizal Arajami v. Tanjong Golden Village Sdn Bhd
(Fredrick Indran XA Nicholas) [2008] 1 ILR 15

Remedies - Compensation in lieu of reinstatement - Whether appropriate under circumstances - Claimant drawing a pension from the company - Whether claimant had contributed to the delay in the case being heard - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Keretapi Tanah Melayu Bhd v. Raja Gopal Murugesu
(Syed Ahmad Radzi Syed Omar) [2008] 1 ILR 200

Remedies - Punishment - Mitigating factors - Whether dismissal had been too harsh under circumstances - Factors to consider - First offence by the claimant - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Keretapi Tanah Melayu Bhd v. Raja Gopal Murugesu
(Syed Ahmad Radzi Syed Omar) [2008] 1 ILR 200

Remedies - Reinstatement - Whether reinstatement proper remedy - Claimant tendered resignation - Resignation accepted by the company - Company then commencing disciplinary proceedings against the claimant - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30 (5)
Aman Teguh - WICC JV Sdn Bhd v. Low Hock Meng
(Chew Soo Ho) [2008] 1 ILR 216

Social security - Who was entitled to benefits - Multiple contributions to SOCSO - Computation of monthly wage - How arrived at - Whether deceased qualified for benefits payable - Employee’s Social Security Act 1969, ss. 6 (1), 6(9), 6(10), 17A, 17(1), 17(2), 20A, 91(2), para. 4(1) & 4(2) Eighth Schedule
Hugh Teo Yu Heng v. Director General Of Social Security Organization
(Muniandy Kannyappan) [2008] 1 ILR 1

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

Copyright ©1997 - 2008 CLJ Legal Network Sdn Bhd (192353 V)
Email: enquiries@cljlaw.com Phone: 603-4270-5400 Fax No : 603-4270 5401 & 603-4270 5402