CASE HIGHTLIGHTS

J MATHEW MIRANDA v. BAHTERA GLOKAL SDN BHD
INDUSTRIAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
NOOR RUWENA MOHD NURDIN
AWARD NO. 1 OF 2018 [CASE NO: 12/4-115/16]
2 JANUARY 2018

CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT: Existence of – Whether there had existed a contract of employment between the parties – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether the claimant had been an employee of the company – Whether he had been dismissed by the company – Whether dismissal without just cause and excuse

EVIDENCE: Documentary evidence – Whether the claimant had been a workman within the definition of s. 2 of the Industrial Relations Act – Claimant paid consultation fees – Whether consultation fees had been reflective of monthly salaries – Factors to consider – Effect of

EVIDENCE: Documentary evidence – Whether the claimant had been a workman within the definition of s. 2 of the Industrial Relations Act – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether he had been hired by the company under a contract for service or a contract of service – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 2

INDUSTRIAL COURT: Jurisdiction – Claimant not a workman under the Industrial Relations Act – Whether the Industrial Court had the jurisdiction to hear his claim for outstanding consultation fees and expenses incurred – Factors to consider – Where his remedy lay

KHOO KIM LOANG v. KIM SIAH ELECTRIC CO SDN BHD
INDUSTRIAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
TAN GHEE PHAIK
AWARD NO. 137 OF 2018 [CASE NO: 13/4-1653/16]
12 JANUARY 2018

DISMISSAL: Misconduct – Claimant submitting a false CV – Whether it had been a serious misconduct – Factors to consider – Whether it had justified his dismissal

DISMISSAL: Misconduct – Whether the claimant had submitted a false CV to secure the job in the respondent company – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether the respondent company could still repose trust and confidence in him – Whether it had justified his immediate dismissal

DOMESTIC INQUIRY: Absence of – Whether it had been necessary to hold one before dismissing the claimant – Factors to consider – Effect of