CASE HIGHTLIGHTS

LIN KAI LAM v. L & W CONCRETE WORKS SDN BHD & ANOTHER CASE
INDUSTRIAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
ANDERSEN ONG WAI LEONG
AWARD NO. 120 OF 2020 [CASE NO: 19/4-648/18]
13 JANUARY 2020

EVIDENCE: Documentary evidence – Whether the claimants had been workmen within the definition of the Industrial Relations Act – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Evaluation of – What the intention of the parties had been – Conduct and actions of the claimants – What it had shown – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 2

INDUSTRIAL COURT: Procedure – Action – Whether the action brought by the claimants against the company had been an abuse of court process – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether it had been a shareholders dispute disguised as a trade dispute – Whether it had been a trade dispute within the definition of the Industrial Relations Act – Factors to consider – Effect of


NG SEOK MAY @ ANGIE SABRINA v. MAXIS BROADBAND SDN BHD
INDUSTRIAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
ANNA NG FUI CHOO
AWARD NO. 122 OF 2020 [CASE NO: 3/4-2921/18]
13 JANUARY 202

DISMISSAL: Breach of company rules and policies – Claimant complaining to the company’s external vendor about the company’s practices – Whether her actions had portrayed the company negatively – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether the claimant had acted unprofessionally and had conducted herself in a manner that had been incompatible with the proper discharge of her duties to the company – Whether charge successfully proven by the company – Whether dismissal with just cause and excuse

DISMISSAL: Insubordination – Whether the claimant’s e-mail trail had shown a consistent pattern of her being disrespectful, evasive, obstructive and insubordinate to COW3 – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether insubordination had been successfully proven against her – Whether her dismissal had been justified under the circumstances – Whether dismissal without just cause and excuse

DISMISSAL: Misconduct – Whether the claimant had posted negative comments and used unsavoury words against her superiors and colleagues on her FB account – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether it had constituted major misconduct – Whether the misconduct had been proven by the company against her – Claimant’s defence – Whether could be accepted – Whether the company had acted reasonably in dismissing her – Whether dismissal with just cause and excuse

EVIDENCE: Admissibility – Whether the audio recording that had been secretly taped by the claimant ought to be allowed into evidence – Factors to consider – Effect of

EVIDENCE: Witness – Claimant giving three different versions of her defence on her FB postings – Whether she had been a credible and reliable witness – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of