|
CHAN NGA GUAN v. COGDEV MALAYSIA SDN BHD
INDUSTRIAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
SAROJINI KANDASAMY
AWARD NO. 324 OF 2017 [CASE NO: 4/4-512/15]
27 FEBRUARY 2017
DISMISSAL: Retrenchment - Redundancy - Claimant retrenched - Claimant pregnant when she had been retrenched - Whether the company had victimised her due to her pregnancy - Evidence adduced - Evaluation of - Whether a genuine redundancy situation had arisen in the company - Company's actions towards her - Whether her retrenchment had been carried out bona fide
DISMISSAL: Retrenchment - Redundancy - Claimant retrenched - Claimant remaining employed and paid by the company over the 6-week separation or time frame set by the company - What it had shown of the company's intentions - Whether the claimant's position had been surplus to the company's needs - Evidence adduced - Factors to consider - Effect of - Whether the claimant's retrenchment had been carried out bona fide
DISMISSAL: Retrenchment - Redundancy - Claimant retrenched - Whether she had been given notice of it - Factors to consider - Evidence adduced - Evaluation of - Effect of - Whether the claimant's retrenchment had been carried out bona fide
DISMISSAL: Retrenchment - Redundancy - Claimant retrenched - Whether the company had been under an obligation to source alternative opportunities for her - Factors to consider - Effect of - Actions taken by the company - Claimant's actions - What it had shown
DISMISSAL: Retrenchment - Redundancy - Claimant retrenched - Whether the company had borne the burden of reskilling and retraining the claimant - Evidence adduced - Claimant declining training programmes provided by the company without finding out about course content - What it had shown
EVIDENCE: Adverse inference - Company failing to call Arunava Bhattacharjee as its witness - Whether he had been a material witness - Factors to consider - Whether an adverse inference ought to be drawn against it - Evidence Act 1950, s. 114(g)
EVIDENCE: Witness - Credibility - Whether the claimant had been a credible witness - Factors to consider - Effect of
INDUSTRIAL COURT: Pleadings - Claimant failing to plead
non-conformation by the company on the Code of Conduct for Industrial Harmony - Whether parties had been bound by their pleadings - Position of the law - Whether submissions from the Bar should be given any weight - Factors to consider - Effect of
KONG SENG CHAI v. PERUSAHAAN OTOMOBIL NASIONAL SDN BHD
INDUSTRIAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
ANNA NG FUI CHOO
AWARD NO. 465 OF 2017 [CASE NO: 3(13)(25)/4-844/14]
29 MARCH 2017
DISMISSAL: Insubordination - Claimant failing to wear a necktie for the task force meeting despite being instructed to do so - Whether it had constituted insubordinate behaviour - Factors to consider - Evidence adduced - Effect of - His reasons for the same - Whether acceptable - Whether this charge had been proven by the company against him - Whether it had constituted serious misconduct - Whether it had justified the company dismissing him - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss 20(3) & 30(5)
DISMISSAL: Insubordination - Claimant leaving the meeting and failing to return to make his presentation - Whether his actions had constituted insubordinate behaviour - Factors to consider - Evidence adduced - Effect of - Claimant's explanations - Whether acceptable - What his conduct had shown - Whether this allegation had been proven by the company against him - Whether it had constituted a serious misconduct - Claimant's position in the company - Whether the company had been justified in dismissing him based on this ground - Factors to consider - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause and excuse
|
