 |
||
|
||
LATEST CASES (ILR Issue 3 of 2024) |
||
|
SUBJECT INDEX ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Judicial review – Application for – Challenge against decision of Director
General of Industrial Relations (‘DGIR’) – Applicant found guilty of
misconduct and dismissed by company – Applicant made representations to
DGIR – Employer agreed to reinstate applicant to former position with
payment of backwages from date of dismissal – Applicant rejected
reinstatement – DGIR closed representations – Whether DGIR correct in
closing applicant’s representations without referring same to Industrial Court
– Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(1) & (2) – Rules of Court 2012, O. 53 Judicial review – Application for – Judicial review against decision of
Industrial Court – Bank filed trade dispute against applicant – Dispute
premised upon media posting – Bank sought Industrial Court to order
applicant to cease and desist from, and strike down, media posting –
Industrial Court dismissed applicant’s application to strike off bank’s action
– Whether questions of fact must be dealt with and taken into account before
full award could be handed down – Whether there were questions of fact to
be determined – Whether matter should be disposed of on question of law
– Whether s. 22(1) of Trade Unions Act 1959 applied – Whether bank’s
claim should not have been entertained and ought to have been struck off CIVIL PROCEDURE Res judicata – Industrial Court – Non-compliance of collective agreement
awarded through award – Salary increment – Pending matter at Industrial
Court on trade dispute concerning new collective agreement – Whether res judicata applied COMPANY LAW Procedure – Dismissal claims against wound-up company – Winding up –
Voluntary winding up – Leave – Company wound up due to closure of
business – Liquidator issued termination letters to claimants – Companies
Act 2016, s. 439(1)(b) CONTRACT Employment contract – Breach – Constructive dismissal – Claimant claimed
to be sexually harassed by superior – No action taken against superior for
alleged sexual harassment – Claimant claimed constructive dismissal on
grounds that her job scope was reduced and inaction/failure of company to
provide safe and conducive environment – Whether there was fundamental
breach that went to root of employment contract Employment contract – Breach – Employee began pregnancy during
COVID-19 pandemic – Employee unvaccinated due to pregnancy –
Employee advised by consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist to work from
home for remaining period of pregnancy to minimise exposure and risk of
contracting COVID-19 infection – Medical advice reduced to writing and
communicated to employer – Employee immediately pressured to tender
resignation through series of acts and conducts orchestrated by employer –
Whether there was fundamental breach of terms of employment contract INDUSTRIAL COURT Award – Non-compliance – Non-compliance of collective agreement
awarded through award – Salary increment – Whether collective agreement
had been terminated and superseded by new collective agreement – Whether
there was non-compliance of collective agreement – Industrial Relations Act
1967, ss. 56(1) & (2) Jurisdiction – Bank filed trade dispute against applicant premised upon
media posting alleged to be defamatory – Whether jurisdiction of Industrial
Court limited to trade disputes – Whether could include claim based purely
on tortious act – Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 18, 26 LABOUR LAW Dismissal – Retrenchment – Closure of business operations – Claimants
terminated from position due to closure of company – Company wound up
due to serious financial difficulties – Whether dismissal with just cause and
excuse – Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5) Employment – Dismissal – Constructive dismissal – Claimant claimed to be
sexually harassed by superior – No action taken against superior for alleged
sexual harassment – Claimant claimed constructive dismissal on grounds that
her job scope was reduced and inaction/failure of company to provide safe
and conducive environment was fundamental breach that went to root of
employment contract – Whether there was constructive dismissal – Whether
claimant voluntarily resigned – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3) Employment – Dismissal – Constructive dismissal – Employee began
pregnancy during COVID-19 pandemic – Employee unvaccinated due to
pregnancy – Employee advised by consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist
to work from home for remaining period of pregnancy to minimise exposure
and risk of contracting COVID-19 infection – Medical advice reduced to
writing and communicated to employer – Employee immediately pressured
to tender resignation through series of acts and conducts orchestrated by
employer – Whether there was constructive dismissal – Whether employer’s
conduct significantly breached essence of employment contract – Whether
employer no longer intended to be bound terms of employment contract –
Whether reinstatement proper remedy – Industrial Relations Act 1967,
ss. 20(3), 30(5) & 30(6A) Employment – Dismissal – Misconduct – Dishonesty to employer –
Falsifying information, misrepresentation, deceiving and cheating –
Employer involved in food industry – Employer received complaints on
wrong expiry date on kwik-loks – Employer instructed employee to
investigate on complaint – Employee instructed subordinate to replace
wrongly printed kwik-loks dates with newly printed ones to give false
impression that there was no mistake – Matter came to light and employee
dismissed from employment – Whether misconduct complained of by
employer had been established – Whether proven misconduct constituted
just cause or excuse for dismissal – Industrial Relations Act, s. 20(3) & 30(5 Employment – Dismissal – Misconduct – Employee faced four allegations
of misconduct – Issues with superior – Quarrelling, arguing, lying, refusing
to follow instructions and using bad and abusive words – Employee given
ample opportunity but failed to improve himself – Whether acts of
misconduct proven – Whether dismissal with just cause or excuse –
Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5 Employment – Dismissal – Reinstatement – Rejection of reinstatement –
Applicant found guilty of misconduct and dismissed by company – Applicant
made representations to Director General of Industrial Relations (‘DGIR’)
– Employer agreed to reinstate applicant to former position with payment of
backwages from date of dismissal – Applicant rejected reinstatement – DGIR
closed representations – Whether DGIR correct in closing applicant’s
representations without referring same to Industrial Court – Industrial
Relations Act 1967, s. 20(1) & (2) Employment – Dismissal – Unfair dismissal – Claim – Employee involved
in workplace accident and given medical leave for total period of 102 days
– Employee utilised annual and emergency leaves – Employer terminated
employee’s employment as employee was unfit for duty and unable to carry
out contractual duties that he had been employed for – Parties reconciled and
employee reinstated employee to former position – Employee delayed
response to employer’s reinstatement and did not attend work – Whether
there was unfair dismissal – Whether reinstatement to former position
nullified dismissal – Whether it was employee who failed to report for work
– Industrial Relations Act , ss. 20(3) & 30(5) Employment – Dismissal – Unfair dismissal – Employee faced four
allegations of misconduct – Issues with superior – Quarrelling, arguing,
lying, refusing to follow instructions and using bad and abusive words –
Employee given ample opportunity but failed to improve himself – Whether
there was workplace unfair treatment intended to induce employee to
voluntarily resign – Whether dismissal with just cause or excuse – Industrial
Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5) Social security – Workplace accident – Temporary disability benefit –
Employee involved in workplace accident and given medical leave for total
period of 102 days – Employee received salary from employer while under
long period of medical leave and at same time received temporary disability
benefit from Social Security Organisation (‘SOCSO’) – Whether employee
entitled to salary from employer while receiving benefits from SOCSO –
Whether there was unjust enrichment – Employment Act 1955, s. 60F(4) –
Employees’ Social Security (General) Regulations 1971, r. 109 TRADE DISPUTE Collective agreement – Articles – Disputes – Dispute on duration and
termination of agreement, hours of work, retirement benefit, bonus, annual
increment/incremental date, principle governing salary conversion, Friday
prayers and salary scale – Whether proposals by Trade Union ought to be
accepted – Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 26(1) & 30(4), (5) & (7) Collective agreement – Non-compliance – Non-compliance of collective
agreement awarded through award – Salary increment – Whether collective
agreement had been terminated and superseded by new collective agreement
– Whether there was non-compliance of collective agreement – Industrial
Relations Act 1967, ss. 56(1) & (2) WORDS & PHRASES ‘special circumstances’ – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 56(2) – Power of
Industrial Court to make such order as it considers desirable to vary or set
aside any term of award or collective agreement upon ‘special circumstances’
– Whether financial difficulties or financial struggle considered as ‘special
circumstances’ ‘suit’ – Trade Unions Act 1959, s. 22(1) – Whether includes any Ministerial
reference to Industrial Court under s. 26(2) of Industrial Relations Act 1967 INDEKS PERKARA KONTRAK Kontrak perkhidmatan – Terma dan syarat – Pelanggaran – Pihak menuntut
dilantik sebagai Imam untuk menunaikan solat berjemaah lima waktu di
masjid – Sama ada penamatan perkhidmatan pihak menuntut dibuat secara
adil – Sama ada tindakan majikan menamatkan perkhidmatan tidak wajar
serta tanpa sebab atau alasan munasabah PERBANKAN Bank dan perniagaan bank – Tatacara pengendalian piawai – Pemprosesan
transaksi – Aduan pelanggan tentang transaksi-transaksi yang tidak
dibenarkan – Pekerja bank ditamatkan perkhidmatan berikutan salah laku –
Kegagalan pekerja memastikan adanya pengesahan biometrik sebelum
transaksi dilaksanakan – Sama ada bank telah menyediakan garis panduan/
tatacara pengendalian piawai tentang kaedah pemprosesan transaksi yang
sewajarnya PROSEDUR SIVIL Res judicata – Sama ada prinsip res judicata terpakai – Tindakan –
Perkhidmatan – Penamatan – Pemberhentian kerja – Sama ada syarikat telah
bertindak secara bona fide – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira –
Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Sama ada penamatan perkhidmatan pihak
menuntut dibuat secara adil UNDANG-UNDANG BURUH Pekerjaan – Penamatan – Pihak menuntut bertugas sebagai Imam – Pihak
menuntut ditamatkan perkhidmatan – Sama ada terdapat penamatan – Sama
ada penamatan perkhidmatan pihak menuntut dibuat secara adil – Sama ada
tindakan majikan menamatkan perkhidmatan tidak wajar serta tanpa sebab
atau alasan munasabah – Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, s. 20(3) Pekerjaan – Penamatan perkhidmatan – Industri perbankan – Salah laku –
Aduan pelanggan tentang transaksi-transaksi yang tidak dibenarkan –
Kegagalan pihak menuntut memastikan adanya pengesahan biometrik
sebelum transaksi dilaksanakan – Pihak menuntut ditamatkan perkhidmatan
– Sama ada penamatan perkhidmatan pihak menuntut dibuat atas sebab dan
alasan adil – Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5) Pihak menuntut pemandu jentera – Pihak menuntut diberhentikan kerja atas
alasan pengurangan pekerja – Kemerosotan ekonomi – Sama ada syarikat
telah bertindak secara bona fide – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira –
Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Sama ada penamatan perkhidmatan pihak
menuntut dibuat secara adil – Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, s. 20(3)
& Akta Pekerja 1955, ss. 20 dan 69 |
||
|
