LATEST CASES (ILR Issue 10 of 2021)

SUBJECT INDEX

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Judicial review – Certiorari – Application to quash Minister’s decision granting recognition to trade union (‘TDU’) – Whether existing trade union of employees representing same class of workmen consulted and granted right to be heard – Whether existing trade union likely to be aggrieved by decision – Whether denial of right to be heard breached rules of natural justice – Whether decision to register TDU communicated to existing trade union – Trade Unions Act 1959, s. 12(2) – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 9
Kesatuan Pekerja-pekerja Keretapi Tanah Melayu Bhd v. Menteri Sumber Manusia & Ors
(Ab Karim Ab Jalil, Nor Bee Ariffin & Gunalan Muniandy JJCA) [2021] 4 ILR 1

CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT

Terms and conditions – Resignation – Whether the claimant had resigned from the company – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Evaluation of – Effect of – Contents of his resignation letter – What it had indicated – Position and experience of the claimant – His actions – What it had shown – What he should have done – Whether his resignation letter had merely been an exit proposal
Sukiman Aini v. Transnational Insurance Brokers (M) Sdn Bhd
(Ani Ak Solep) [2021] 4 ILR 151

DISMISSAL

Constructive dismissal – Benefits – Annual leave – Claimant’s leave approved subject to conditions – Effect of – Whether it had been an act of intimidation and abuse of power by COW2 – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of
Elizabeth Agnes A Anthony v. Berjaya Times Square Theme Park Sdn Bhd
(Andersen Ong Wai Leong) [2021] 4 ILR 104

Constructive dismissal – Stern Reminder – Claimant issued 1st Show Cause Letter and an ensuing Stern Reminder for her failure to comply with SOPs – Whether it had amounted to a fundamental breach of her contract of employment – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether there had been malice on the company’s part in issuing her those letters – Claimant’s conduct – What it had shown
Elizabeth Agnes A Anthony v. Berjaya Times Square Theme Park Sdn Bhd
(Andersen Ong Wai Leong) [2021] 4 ILR 104

Constructive dismissal – Transfer – Claimant transferred to Berjaya Times Square Sdn Bhd within days of receiving the Final Stern Warning – Whether the transfer could be viewed independently of the disciplinary action taken against her – Whether the transfer had been a form of punishment meted out on her – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether the company’s actions had been a fundamental breach that had gone to the root of her contract of employment – Whether the transfer had been carried out bona fide – Whether the claimant had been constructively dismissed – Whether dismissal without just cause and excuse
Elizabeth Agnes A Anthony v. Berjaya Times Square Theme Park Sdn Bhd
(Andersen Ong Wai Leong) [2021] 4 ILR 104

Constructive dismissal – Victimisation – Claimant sending letter to company on Henry’s actions/misactions and seeking clarification – Company failing to respond – Claimant issued 2nd Show Cause Letter and Final Stern Warning instead – Whether the company, by its conduct and actions, had acted oppressively and unreasonably towards her – Evidence adduced – Evaluation of – Henry’s reactions to the issues raised by her – What it had shown – Henry found guilty of misconduct and disciplined – Effect of – Whether there had been a fundamental breach of her contract of employment – Whether it had justified her walking out and claiming constructive dismissal
Elizabeth Agnes A Anthony v. Berjaya Times Square Theme Park Sdn Bhd
(Andersen Ong Wai Leong) [2021] 4 ILR 104

Misconduct – Insubordination – Whether the claimant had shouted at Henry and had an altercation with him – Reasons for the same – Whether proven by the company against her – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Evaluation of – Claimant not dismissed for it – Effect of
Elizabeth Agnes A Anthony v. Berjaya Times Square Theme Park Sdn Bhd
(Andersen Ong Wai Leong) [2021] 4 ILR 104

Misconduct – Reporting immediate superior’s actions – Claimant reporting wrongdoings of Henry, her immediate superior – Whether her actions had constituted provocation against the management – Whether her allegations against her immediate superior had created disharmony between employees of the company and management – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Claimant’s job functions – Whether she had been doing her job and protecting the interests of the company – Effect of – Whether the company, by its actions, had damaged the relationship of trust and confidence that had existed between them – Whether it had justified her walking out and claiming constructive dismissal – Whether dismissal without just cause and excuse
Elizabeth Agnes A Anthony v. Berjaya Times Square Theme Park Sdn Bhd
(Andersen Ong Wai Leong) [2021] 4 ILR 104

Retrenchment – Cessation of business – Whether the company had ceased its business – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Claimant retrenched two weeks after MCO imposed – What it had shown – Whether the company had been financially healthy – Effect of – Company’s actions towards its other staff – Effect of – Company allegedly offering to reinstate her twice – Whether the company, by its pleadings, had taken an inconsistent stand in alleging redundancy – Whether the claimant’s retrenchment had been carried out bona fide – Whether dismissal without just cause and excuse
Rasalechumi Kanagaratnam v. Lourdes Medical Services Sdn Bhd
(Augustine Anthony) [2021] 4 ILR 176

Retrenchment – Redundancy – Claimant terminated based on redundancy – Whether a genuine redundancy had existed in the company – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether it had justified the claimant’s retrenchment – Company’s actions towards her – What it had shown – Claimant serving the company loyally for 37 years with no performance or disciplinary issues – Effect of – Whether dismissal without just cause and excuse
Rasalechumi Kanagaratnam v. Lourdes Medical Services Sdn Bhd
(Augustine Anthony) [2021] 4 ILR 176

Retrenchment – Reorganisation – Claimant retrenched based on redundancy – Company transferring the other staff instead – Timing of the transfer – What it had shown – Whether a genuine redundancy had existed in the company – Whether the company had been facing financial constraints due to the Covid-19 pandemic – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether the reorganisation exercise had been carried out bona fide – Effect of – Whether it had displayed unfair labour practices – Effect of – Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse
Rasalechumi Kanagaratnam v. Lourdes Medical Services Sdn Bhd
(Augustine Anthony) [2021] 4 ILR 176

DOMESTIC INQUIRY

Charges – Defective charges – Whether charges 6, 7 and 8 had been defective for want of material particulars – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether it had had to do with her credibility, trustworthiness and integrity – Whether these charges had been an afront to the relationship of trust and confidence between the parties
Elizabeth Agnes A Anthony v. Berjaya Times Square Theme Park Sdn Bhd
(Andersen Ong Wai Leong) [2021] 4 ILR 104

INDUSTRIAL COURT

Procedure – Action – Estoppel – Whether the principle of estoppel or waiver can be rigorously applied against a workman – Claimant accepting company’s ex-gratia payment and then filing an unfair dismissal claim – Whether he could do so
Sukiman Aini v. Transnational Insurance Brokers (M) Sdn Bhd
(Ani Ak Solep) [2021] 4 ILR 151

Remedies – Compensation – Compensation in lieu of reinstatement – Whether the claimant had been entitled to it – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of
Rasalechumi Kanagaratnam v. Lourdes Medical Services Sdn Bhd
(Augustine Anthony) [2021] 4 ILR 176

Remedies – Reinstatement – Whether the claimant had been capable of reinstatement – Claimant 60 during the hearing – Effect of – Whether she had to retire at 60 – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Perusal of her contract of employment and legislation – Effect of – Company’s actions towards her – What it had indicated – Minimum Retirement Age Act 2012
Rasalechumi Kanagaratnam v. Lourdes Medical Services Sdn Bhd
(Augustine Anthony) [2021] 4 ILR 176

LABOUR LAW

Trade union – Recognition – Application to quash Minister’s decision granting recognition to trade union (‘TDU’) – Whether existing trade union of employees representing same class of workmen consulted and granted right to be heard – Whether consultation process mandatory – Whether affected interests of workmen in same industry – Whether existing trade union likely to be aggrieved by decision – Whether denial of right to be heard breached rules of natural justice – Whether decision to register TDU communicated to existing trade union – Trade Unions Act 1959, s. 12(2) – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 9
Kesatuan Pekerja-pekerja Keretapi Tanah Melayu Bhd v. Menteri Sumber Manusia & Ors
(Ab Karim Ab Jalil, Nor Bee Ariffin & Gunalan Muniandy JJCA) [2021] 4 ILR 1

TRADE DISPUTE

Collective Agreement – Interpretation of the article on retrenchment benefits – Whether UW2 had been entitled to it – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – UW2’s actions and choices – What it had shown
Kesatuan Pekerja-pekerja Perkilangan Perusahaan Makanan v. Nestle Manufacturing (M) Sdn Bhd
(Anna Ng Fui Choo) [2021] 4 ILR 29

Collective Agreement – Interpretation of article on retrenchment benefits – Whether UW2 had either been redundant or declared redundant by the company – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of
Kesatuan Pekerja-pekerja Perkilangan Perusahaan Makanan v. Nestle Manufacturing (M) Sdn Bhd
(Anna Ng Fui Choo) [2021] 4 ILR 29

Collective Agreement – Terms and conditions of service – Article on housing allowance – Union proposing a doubling of the current allowance – Whether the proposal for an increase ought to be allowed – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of
Kesatuan Pekerja-pekerja Industri Perkayuan Sarawak v. Magna Foremost Sdn Bhd
(Ani Ak Solep) [2021] 4 ILR 133

Collective Agreement – Terms and conditions of service – Article on long service allowance – Whether the union’s proposal that it also be paid to local employees should be allowed – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of
Kesatuan Pekerja-pekerja Industri Perkayuan Sarawak v. Magna Foremost Sdn Bhd
(Ani Ak Solep) [2021] 4 ILR 133

Collective Agreement – Terms and conditions of service – Article on salary adjustment – Whether the union’s proposal for a 20% increase had been reasonable – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether the company had had the financial ability to pay
Kesatuan Pekerja-pekerja Industri Perkayuan Sarawak v. Magna Foremost Sdn Bhd
(Ani Ak Solep) [2021] 4 ILR 133

Collective Agreement – Terms and conditions of service – Article on transport allowance – Union proposing an increase of RM100 per month – Whether the proposal for an increase ought to be allowed – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of
Kesatuan Pekerja-pekerja Industri Perkayuan Sarawak v. Magna Foremost Sdn Bhd
(Ani Ak Solep) [2021] 4 ILR 133

Collective Agreement – Terms and conditions of service – Article on working allowance – Whether the union’s proposal for RM10 a day should be allowed – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of
Kesatuan Pekerja-pekerja Industri Perkayuan Sarawak v. Magna Foremost Sdn Bhd
(Ani Ak Solep) [2021] 4 ILR 133

INDEKS PERKARA

KETERANGAN

Keterangan dokumentari – YM dijemput untuk satu pertemuan tetapi tidak diberikan sebab mengapa pertemuan itu diadakan – Pertemuan itu lebih merupakan siasatan dan minit tidak dicatat – Pertemuan itu disusuli dengan surat amaran yang dikeluarkan terhadap beliau – Sama ada tindakan pihak syarikat telah menjadikan beliau seorang mangsa – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Kesannya
Lawrence Arokiasamy lwn. International University Of Malaya-Wales Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Zulbahrin Zainuddin) [2021] 4 ILR 66

KONTRAK PERKHIDMATAN

Terma dan syarat – Surat tunjuk sebab – Sama ada surat tunjuk sebab yang diserahkan kepada YM adalah teratur – YM dihadapkan dengan salah laku yang sama di mana beliau telah menerima amaran untuknya sebelum itu – Sama ada beliau mengalami double jeapordy melalui tindakan pihak syarikat – Pihak syarikat mengambil keputusan untuk menamatkan perkhidmatannya sebelum siasatan habis dijalankan dan sebelum tempoh notis surat tunjuk sebab tersebut habis – Kesannya
Lawrence Arokiasamy lwn. International University Of Malaya-Wales Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Zulbahrin Zainuddin) [2021] 4 ILR 66

MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN

Prosedur – YM memfailkan aduan di Jabatan Tenaga Kerja Tapah dan menariknya balik sebelum memfailkan tuntutan di bawah s. 20 Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967 di Perak – Kesannya – Sama ada prinsip res judicata terpakai – Maksud rangkap “Tidak dibenarkan memfailkan semula” – Syarikat tidak membantah sehingga pendengaran tindakan ini – Kesannya
Thanabalan Ponnuveloo lwn. Teik Joo Chan Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Zulbahrin Zainuddin) [2021] 4 ILR 44

Remedi – Bayaran pampasan galang ganti pengembalian ke jawatan semula – Penentuan bayaran pampasan – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Kesannya
Lawrence Arokiasamy lwn. International University Of Malaya-Wales Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Zulbahrin Zainuddin) [2021] 4 ILR 66

PEMBUANGAN KERJA

Ketidakturutan – YM gagal mengemukakan Laporan Kehadiran Pelajar yang teratur apabila diminta – Sama ada pengemukaan Laporan tersebut merupakan sebahagian daripada deskripsi kerjanya – Sama ada tindakan beliau merupakan satu ketidakturutan kepada arahan pihak syarikat – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Kesannya – Penjelasan YM – Sama ada munasabah dan dapat diterima – Laporan tersebut apabila dikemukakan bagi kali kedua tidak teratur – Kesannya – Sama ada pertuduhan ini berjaya dibuktikan oleh pihak syarikat terhadapnya – Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab
Lawrence Arokiasamy lwn. International University Of Malaya-Wales Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Zulbahrin Zainuddin) [2021] 4 ILR 66

Pemangsaan (Victimisation) – Sama ada YM telah dijadikan mangsa – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Kesannya – Sama ada pertuduhan ini berjaya dibuktikan oleh YM terhadap pihak syarikat – Kesannya
Lawrence Arokiasamy lwn. International University Of Malaya-Wales Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Zulbahrin Zainuddin) [2021] 4 ILR 66

Pemecatan secara konstruktif – Gaji dan tugasan – Pihak syarikat gagal dan/atau enggan memberi kerja kepada YM – Sama ada tindakan syarikat tersebut merupakan satu perlanggaran terma asas kontrak antara kedua pihak – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Kesannya – Sama ada tindakan syarikat tersebut telah memberi tekanan kepada YM untuk meninggalkan perkhidmatannya – Penilaian keterangan – Kesannya – Rekod perkhidmatan YM dengan syarikat – Apa ia menunjukkan – Sama ada YM telah dibuang kerja secara konstruktif – Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab
Thanabalan Ponnuveloo lwn. Teik Joo Chan Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Zulbahrin Zainuddin) [2021] 4 ILR 44

Pemecatan secara konstruktif – Gaji dan tugasan – Pihak syarikat gagal dan/atau enggan memberi kerja kepada YM – YM hanya menerima wang pendahuluan dan bukan gaji – Sama ada berjaya dibuktikan oleh YM terhadap pihak syarikat – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Penilaian keterangan – Kesannya – Penjelasan syarikat – Sama ada dapat diterima – Kelakuan YM terhadap pihak syarikat pada setiap masa yang material – Tindakan syarikat sebaliknya – Apa ia menunjukkan – Sama ada beliau dianggap sebagai pekerja syarikat pada setiap masa yang material – Sama ada syarikat telah melanggar terma dan syarat kontrak perkhidmatannya dengan YM – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Sama ada YM telah dibuang kerja secara konstruktif – Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab – Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Thanabalan Ponnuveloo lwn. Teik Joo Chan Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Zulbahrin Zainuddin) [2021] 4 ILR 44

Salah laku – Sama ada pergeseran telah berlaku antara YM dengan COW4 di mesyuarat fakulti pada 6 Mac 2019 – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Sama ada ianya merupakan satu salah laku – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Kesannya – Tindakan syarikat – Apa ia menunjukkan – Syarikat kemudiannya mengeluarkan surat tunjuk sebab atas pertuduhan yang sama – Kesannya – Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab – Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Lawrence Arokiasamy lwn. International University Of Malaya-Wales Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Zulbahrin Zainuddin) [2021] 4 ILR 66

Salah laku – Sama ada YM bertanggungjawab untuk ulasan negatif berkaitan dengan pihak syarikat yang dimuat naik di dalam Google Review – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Penilaian keterangan – Kesannya – Sama ada pertuduhan ini berjaya dibuktikan oleh pihak syarikat terhadapnya – Sama ada ia mewajarkan pembuangan kerjanya – Surat tunjuk sebab diserahkan ke atas beliau sebelum siasatan habis dijalankan – Kesannya
Lawrence Arokiasamy lwn. International University Of Malaya-Wales Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Zulbahrin Zainuddin) [2021] 4 ILR 66

Salah laku – Sama ada YM telah tidak menghormati dan mempertikaikan perlantikan COW2 – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Kesannya – Sama ada pertuduhan ini berjaya dibuktikan oleh pihak syarikat terhadapnya – Kesannya – Sama ada ia mewajarkan pembuangan kerjanya
Lawrence Arokiasamy lwn. International University Of Malaya-Wales Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Zulbahrin Zainuddin) [2021] 4 ILR 66

SIASATAN DALAMAN

Siasatan yang dijalankan oleh syarikat – COW2 yang mempunyai kepentingan, menjalankan siasatan dan membuat keputusan terhadap YM – Kesannya – COW1 pula mengumpul maklumat, menyiasat dan membuat keputusan – Sama ada proses ini adil terhadap YM – Sama ada ianya menyalahi peraturan – Apa yang pihak syarikat sepatutnya lakukan
Lawrence Arokiasamy lwn. International University Of Malaya-Wales Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Zulbahrin Zainuddin) [2021] 4 ILR 66