| BULLETIN 09/2015 | |
|
LATEST CASES (ILR Issue 8 of 2015) SUBJECT INDEX ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Disciplinary proceedings - Public officer - Reduction in rank - Right to be heard - Failure to grant oral hearing - Whether contravened art. 135(2), Federal Constitution - Whether respondent's representation complete without oral hearing Judicial review - Application for - Applicants co-authored letter that caused negative impression on Companies Commission of Malaysia - Disciplinary proceedings - Dismissal and demotion - Whether disciplinary proceedings conducted erroneously - Whether proper investigations carried out against applicants - Whether appropriate punishment meted out - Whether standard, burden and procedure in court should be similarly applied for a disciplinary action Judicial review - Application for - Certiorari - Recognition of trade Union - Competency - Procedures of law - Whether Minister erred in finding that Union was competent to represent workers of company CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Constitution - Federal Constitution, art. 135(2) - Request for oral hearing - Failure to grant - Whether contravened art. 135(2) - Whether right to reasonable opportunity of being heard under art. 135(2) synonymous with right to oral hearing CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT Terms and conditions - Bonus - Whether the claimant had been entitled to a contractual bonus - Claimant failing to adduce her employment contract in court - Effect of - Whether her claim under this head should be allowed Terms and conditions - No clause on the need to furnish proof of qualifications - Whether there had been a need for one - What clauses contracts of employment generally contain - When is there a requirement to show proof of qualifications - No evidence of whether an advertisement had been put up for the post or what had transpired in the job interview in relation to it - Effect of - Whether the claimant had known that he had obtained the job based on his representation that he had been a lawyer Type of - Fixed-term contract - Whether the claimant had been employed under a genuine fixed-term contract - Claimant's contract stating fixed-term contract - Effect of - Company's Memorandum and Articles of Association providing for the hire of mediators on a temporary basis - Whether that had taken away the real nature of the employment Type of - Fixed-term contract - Whether the claimant had been employed under a genuine fixed-term contract - Factors to consider - Effect of - Type of work carried out by the claimant - Treatment of the company towards her - Whether she had had a legitimate expectation to continue to earn a livelihood - Evidence adduced - Evaluation of - Her requests to the company - Effect of - Whether she had been dismissed - Whether dismissal without just cause and excuse DISMISSAL Abandonment - Claimant absent from work without informing his superiors at the earliest opportunity - Whether the claimant had abandoned his job - Evidence adduced - Effect of - Whether the claimant had adhered to the company's rules and policies - Whether the claimant had repeatedly committed the same misconduct - Company warning him numerous times to no avail - Whether it had been a serious misconduct - Whether his dismissal had been without just cause and excuse Absenteeism - Whether the claimant had been absent without leave - Whether he had attempted to inform the company at the earliest opportunity - Evidence adduced - Evaluation of - Whether proven by the company - Conduct of the company towards him - Whether the company had been justified in dismissing him - Factors to consider - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause and excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5) Misconduct - Misrepresentation - Whether the claimant had misrepresented himself as a lawyer with experience in practice - Evidence adduced - Effect of - Whether the company had relied on his misrepresentation to give him the post - Requirements of the post - Factors to consider - Effect of - What the claimant should have done - Whether the misconduct had been established against him - Whether it had constituted a breach of the fiduciary relationship between an employer and employee - Whether the company had been reasonable in dismissing him - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5) Notice of termination - Claimant summarily dismissed - Reasons for the same - Whether he had been aware of the reasons for his dismissal - Claimant failing to write to the company and seek an explanation - What that had reflected - His justification for the same - Whether could be accepted - Whether dismissal without just cause and excuse Notice of termination - Contents of - Mistake made by the company - Whether it had been a fatal mistake - Factors to consider - Employment Act 1955, s. 15(2) Performance - Unsatisfactory performance - Whether proven by the company - Evidence adduced - Evaluation of - Whether it had been sufficient to discharge the company's burden of proof - Effect of - Whether the claimant had been given warnings and a chance to improve - Factors to consider - Effect of - Whether she had been objectively assessed - Conduct of the company and COW1 - Whether in breach of the rules of natural justice - What the company should have done - Whether dismissal without just cause and excuse Performance - Unsatisfactory performance - Whether the claimant had been warned of the same - Claimant's explanations - How the company should have reacted to it - Whether the company's actions towards her had been reasonable - Effect of - Whether this charge had been proven by the company - Evidence adduced Retrenchment - Closure of SL - SL suffering financial loss and being closed down by the company - Whether proven by the company - Evidence adduced - Whether the claimant's position had become redundant - Factors to consider - Effect of Retrenchment - Redundancy - Whether the claimant's position had been redundant - Factors to consider - Effect of - Whether the company's decision had been tainted with malice or been carried out mala fide - Evidence adduced - Whether dismissal without just cause and excuse Retrenchment - Redundancy - Whether the claimant's position had been redundant - LIFO principles not followed - Whether it had been suitable for the company to follow the LIFO principles - Position held by the claimant EVIDENCE Adverse inference - Claimant failing to call his immediate supervisor - Whether his evidence had been material - Factors to consider - Whether an adverse inference ought to be drawn against the claimant - Evidence Act 1950, s. 114(g) Adverse inference - Company failing to adduce the audited accounts for its entire business - Whether it had been necessary - Factors to consider - Effect of - Whether an adverse inference ought to be drawn against it - Evidence Act 1950, s. 114(g) Adverse inference - Company failing to call the claimant's immediate supervisor - Reasons for the same - Whether suitable to draw an adverse inference against the company - Factors to consider - Evidence Act 1950, s. 114(g) Documentary evidence - SMS communications between COW2 and the claimant - Whether it had evidentiary value - SMSes not being objected to by the claimant at the commencement of the hearing - Effect of INDUSTRIAL COURT Procedure - Action - Minister's reference stating dismissal on 2 April 2012 - Claimant only dismissed on 5 April 2012 - Effect of - Whether the question of her dismissal being without just cause and excuse had arisen - Factors to consider Remedies - Compensation - Backwages - Whether suitable to be granted in this case - Factors to consider - Effect of - What would be a suitable amount to award - Probationer claimant Remedies - Compensation - Compensation in lieu of reinstatement - Claimant past the age of retirement at the hearing of the matter - Effect of - When this remedy is suitable to be awarded - Whether it ought to be awarded to the claimant in this case - Factors to consider - Effect of Remedies - Reinstatement - Claimant past the age of retirement at the hearing of the matter - Whether a suitable remedy to award - Factors to consider - Effect of LABOUR LAW Trade union - Recognition - Recognition to represent workers of company - Whether decision of competency made by Director of Industrial Relations (`DGIR') - Whether DGIR had power to make decision - Whether Minister could decide on issue of competency based on reports of DGIR NON-COMPLIANCE Collective Agreement - Article on payment of retrenchment - Whether the company had followed the LIFO principle in retrenching CLW1 - Factors to consider - Effect of - Whether there had been any improper motive to retrench CLW1 - Evidence adduced - Evaluation of - Whether there had been non-compliance by the company - Effect of Collective Agreement - Article on retrenchment - Whether the company had faced a redundancy situation - Factors to consider - Evidence adduced - Effect of - Whether there had been non-compliance by the company INDEKS PERKARA KETERANGAN Saksi - Keterangan yang bercanggah - YM memberi keterangan yang bercanggah di dalam Pernyataan Kes dan Pernyataan Saksinya - Sama ada harus diambil kira - Sama ada ianya merupakan suatu afterthought - Kesannya MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN PEMBUANGAN KERJA Ketidakhadiran - YM gagal untuk hadir bekerja - Sama ada berjaya dibuktikan oleh syarikat - Keterangan yang dikemukakan - Kesannya - Penjelasan YM - Sama ada dapat diterima - YM bergantung kepada e-mel-e-mel yang tidak ditujukan kepadanya - Tiada sebarang surat atau arahan secara lisan daripada syarikat responden berkenaan penamatan perkhidmatannya - Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab Ketidakpatuhan terhadap peraturan dan polisi syarikat - YM dituduh memiliki lukisan teknikal syarikat tanpa kebenaran - Sama ada berjaya dibuktikan oleh syarikat responden - Keterangan yang dikemukakan - Kesannya - Pembelaan YM - Sama ada dapat diterima - Sama ada salah laku tersebut merupakan satu salah laku yang serius - Sama ada ia mewajarkan pembuangan kerja YM - Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira Ketidakturutan - YM enggan menandatangani Confidentiality Agreement syarikat responden - Sama ada berjaya dibuktikan oleh syarikat - Keterangan yang dikemukakan - Kesannya - Pembelaan YM - Sama ada dapat diterima - Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira - Sama ada salah laku tersebut merupakan suatu salah laku yang serius - Jawatan yang dipegang oleh YM dalam syarikat - Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab Notis penamatan - Penamatan kerja secara paksa - Sama ada YM telah dipaksa meletak jawatan - Keterangan yang dikemukakan - Kesannya - Tiada perhubungan secara formal antara YM dengan syarikat berkenaan pengesahan jawatannya - Kesannya - Sama ada dakwaan beliau boleh diterima - Sama ada YM telah dibuang kerja Notis penamatan - Penamatan kerja secara paksa - YM meletak jawatan tetapi menarik balik surat perletakan jawatannya - Dalam keadaan mana ianya boleh diterima - Prinsip undang-undang – Kesannya Notis penamatan - Penamatan kerja secara paksa - YM meletak jawatan tetapi menarik balik surat perletakan jawatannya - Syarikat menerima perletakan jawatan beliau setelah ianya ditarik balik oleh beliau - Kesannya - Sama ada tindakan syarikat tersebut merupakan suatu pembuangan kerja - Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira - Kesannya - Sama ada YM telah dibuang kerja Penghematan - Penutupan perniagaan - Sama ada syarikat responden diarahkan oleh Jabatan Tersebut untuk menutup perniagaannya - Keterangan yang dikemukakan - Kesannya - Sama ada kegagalan syarikat responden mendaftarkan operasi Day Care Centre tersebut secara sah, melibatkan YM - Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira - Kesannya - Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab Penghematan - Penutupan perniagaan - Syarikat responden menutup perniagaannya - Alasan syarikat responden untuk menutup perniagaannya - Sama ada berjaya dibuktikan oleh syarikat responden - Keterangan yang dikemukakan - Kesannya - Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM berdasarkan alasan ini adalah munasabah - Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira - Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab Prestasi kerja - Sama ada prestasi kerja YM memuaskan - YM gagal untuk mencapai sasaran jualannya - Sasaran jualan tidak dinyatakan di dalam kontrak perkhidmatannya - Arahan syarikat responden berkenaan sasaran jualan - Sama ada telah dipatuhi oleh YM - Pembelaan YM - Sama ada dapat diterima - Kesannya - Sama ada salah laku YM serius - Sama ada pembuangan kerjanya telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab |
|
| Copyright Mylawbox Sdn Bhd | Subscribe | Unsubscribe |
