 |
||
|
||
LATEST CASES (ILR Issue 2 of 2022) |
||
|
SUBJECT INDEX ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Judicial review – Appeal against – Appeal by Director-General of Public
Services Department (‘PSD’) – Applicant joined general public service as
crane driver – Applicant declined to join service of Port Klang Authority as
crane driver (portal) – Applicant compulsorily retired as post abolished – Pension calculated based on last drawn monthly salary in general public
service as crane driver (portal) – Coming into force of Pensions Adjustment
Act 1980 provides for pensions to be increased by 2% annually – Applicant’s
last drawn salary adjusted based on salary grade of D38 in Government
service – Whether pension should be adjusted based on position of crane
driver (high portal), grade D5 – Applicant’s appeals to PSD rejected – Applicant appealed to High Court against decision of PSD – High Court
allowed re-determination of pension payable – Whether decision valid,
rational or proper – Rules of Court 2012, O. 53 Judicial review – Certiorari and mandamus – Dismissal from service on
ground of misconduct – Absence from work without permission – Whether
misconduct warranted disciplinary action – Whether disciplinary process
tainted with procedural impropriety – Whether action taken ‘as soon as
possible’ by superior – Whether delay amounted to condonation – Whether
failure to consider defence of condonation warranted appellate interference Judicial review – Public Servants – Termination of probationary police
officer by Police Force Commission – Non-confirmation by Head of
Department – Whether Commission’s decision absolute – Whether could
still be challenged in court – Whether Commission’s decision could be
challenged on ground of irrationality, procedural impropriety, illegality and
unreasonableness – Whether Commission’s decision jusiticiable – Public
Officers (Appointment, Promotion and Termination of Service) Regulations
2012, regs. 29(4) & 50(1) Public Servants – Dismissal from police force – Termination of probationary
police officer by Police Force Commission – Non-confirmation by Head of
Department – Whether Commission ought to provide reasons for nonconfirmation – Whether termination in accordance with terms of appointment – Whether probationary officer fit to be confirmed – Whether
letter of certification to be issued by Head of Department – Whether
Commission under duty to give copy of certification to probationary officer – Public Officers (Appointment, Promotion and Termination of Service)
Regulations 2012, regs. 29(4) & 50(1) CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT Terms and conditions – Resignation – Whether the claimant had voluntarily
resigned – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of DISMISSAL Constructive dismissal – Change in job function – Whether COW2 had
undermined the claimant’s authority in his job and hindered him from
carrying out his job effectively – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Position of COW2 in the company – What the company’s actions towards him had shown – Whether it had been carried out bona fide – Whether it had justified him walking out of his employment and claiming
constructive dismissal Constructive dismissal – Status – Claimant’s resignation letter rejected as
investigations still ongoing against him – Whether his reasons for resigning
had been proven by the evidence – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether the rejection of his resignation had constituted a
fundamental breach of his contract of employment Constructive dismissal – Status – Company failing to respond to claimant’s
query seeking an assurance or confirmation on his status of employment and
rejecting his resignation – Whether it had constituted a fundamental breach
of his contract of employment – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – What the company’s actions had shown – Claimant not
cooperating with the investigations – What it had indicated – Whether he had
been constructively dismissed – Whether dismissal without just cause and
excuse Constructive dismissal – Transfer – Claimant transferred to Kuantan during
his extended probation period and COW2 indicating non-confirmation of his
employment even if he accepted the transfer – Whether it had been
acceptable behaviour on the part of the company – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether the company’s actions had been a
fundamental breach that had gone to the root of his 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 Constructive dismissal – Victimisation – COW2 berating, taunting, verbally
abusing and threatening the claimant on numerous occasions – Reasons for
the same – What the company’s actions towards him had indicated – Whether the verbal abuse, intimidation and threats had been an acceptable
way for COW2 to guide and reprimand the claimant – Effect of – Whether
it had justified him walking out of his employment and claiming constructive
dismissal – Whether the claimant had delayed walking out in response to the
breach Constructive dismissal – Warning letter – Claimant issued a warning letter
by the company despite apologising and explaining himself – Whether it had
amounted to a fundamental breach of his contract of employment – Factors
to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether it had justified him
walking out of his employment and claiming constructive dismissal Performance – Poor performance – Whether the claimant had been unable
to perform his duty, been lazy in carrying out his tasks and had complaints
about his work performance not being satisfactory – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether successfully proven by the company
against him – Whether his dismissal had been justified – Whether it had been
carried out with just cause and excuse EVIDENCE Adverse inference – Company failing to call WV to testify despite him still
being with it – Whether WV had been a material witness – Whether an
adverse inference ought to be drawn against the company for it – Evidence
Act 1950, s. 114(g) Documentary evidence – Whether the claimant had been a workman within
the definition of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Degree of control the company had had over
him – What it had indicated – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 2 INDUSTRIAL COURT Procedure – Action – Estoppel – Whether it had applied to industrial
jurisprudence – Claimant signing Settlement Agreement – Whether it had
estopped him from bringing this claim against the company – Factors to
consider – Effect of Remedies – Backwages – Whether suitable to award and calculation of
quantum – Probationer claimant Remedies – Compensation – Backwages – Quantum of – Determination of – Factors to consider – Effect of Remedies – Compensation – Compensation in lieu of reinstatement – Whether the claimant had been entitled to it – Length of service with the
company – Effect of Remedies – Compensation in lieu of reinstatement – Whether it ought to be
allowed – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of Remedies – Exemplary and punitive damages – Whether it ought to be
allowed – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of Remedies – Reinstatement – Whether suitable to award – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether the claimant had abandoned this
remedy Remedies – Reinstatement – Whether suitable to grant – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of LABOUR LAW Dismissal – Misconduct – Absence from work without permission – Whether misconduct warranted disciplinary action – Whether period of
absence triggered operation of reg. 26 of Public Officers (Conduct and
Disciplinary) Regulations 1993 – Whether disciplinary process tainted with
procedural impropriety – Whether action taken ‘as soon as possible’ by
superior – Whether delay amounted to condonation – Whether failure to
consider defence of condonation warranted appellate interference Employment – Contract of employment – Whether genuine fixed term
contract or permanent employee – Fixed term contract with automatic
renewal without intermittent breaks – Whether employee appointed for
specific project or all projects of employer – Whether employee treated as
permanent employee – Whether successive renewal of contract without
application by employee showed employment intended to be permanent INDEKS PERKARA KETERANGAN Keterangan dokumentari – Sijil-sijil yang dikemukakan oleh YM dalam
keterangannya – Sama ada dapat diterima oleh Mahkamah – Faktor-faktor
yang harus diambil kira – Kesannya – Akta Keterangan 1950, ss. 35 & 74 KONTRAK PERKHIDMATAN Terma dan syarat – Penentuan tarikh/tahun YM mula bekerja dengan pihak
syarikat – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Keterangan yang
dikemukakan – Kesannya Terma dan syarat – Surat penamatan kerja – YM diberikan surat dan cek dan
diberhentikan kerja dengan serta merta – Sama ada ia merupakan "summary
dismissal" – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Penilaian keterangan – Kesannya – Sama ada ia melanggar prinsip keadilan asasi – Sama ada
pembuangan kerja beliau telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab PEMBUANGAN KERJA Kehadiran – Ketidakhadiran – Sama ada YM gagal hadir bertugas untuk dua
hari tanpa kebenaran syarikat – Sama ada berjaya dibuktikan oleh syarikat
terhadapnya – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Keterangan yang
dikemukakan – Kesannya – Penjelasan YM – Sama ada dapat diterima – Sama ada salah laku tersebut merupakan salah laku serius – Sama ada salah
laku tersebut mewajarkan pembuangan kerjanya – Kesannya – Sama ada
pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab Kehadiran – Ketidakhadiran – YM gagal hadir bertugas untuk dua hari tanpa
kebenaran syarikat dan gaji beliau dipotong – Kesannya – Beliau
kemudiannya dibuang kerja atas salah laku yang sama – Sama ada ianya
merupakan "double punishment" – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Autoriti-autoriti yang dikemukakan – Penilaian – Kesannya Salah laku – Sama ada YM telah meminjam Cylinder Head syarikat dan
memulangkan Cylinder Head lain yang telah rosak – Pertuduhan tersebut
hanya ditimbulkan dalam pliding syarikat buat kali pertama – Sama ada
pertuduhan ini berjaya dibuktikan oleh pihak syarikat terhadapnya – Faktor-faktor
yang harus diambil kira – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Kesannya – Syarikat gagal memberikan beliau amaran atau mengeluarkan surat tunjuk
sebab kepada beliau – Kesannya – Sama ada ia mewajarkan pembuangan
kerjanya Salah laku – Sama ada YM telah mengeluarkan kata-kata yang kesat,
berbentuk ugutan dan berunsur perkauman terhadap COW3 – Faktor-faktor
yang harus diambil kira – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Kesannya – Sama
ada salah laku ini berjaya dibuktikan oleh syarikat terhadapnya – Sama ada
pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab Salah laku – YM mengemukakan resit hotel yang palsu – Pertuduhan
tersebut hanya ditimbulkan dalam pliding syarikat buat kali pertama – Kesannya – Sama ada berjaya dibuktikan oleh syarikat terhadapnya – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Penilaian keterangan – Kesannya – Syarikat
gagal memberikan beliau amaran atau mengeluarkan surat tunjuk sebab
kepada beliau – Kesannya – Sama ada beliau dinafikan peluang untuk
menjawab pertuduhan tersebut – Sama ada ia mewajarkan pembuangan
kerjanya Salah laku – YM menubuhkan MMS – Pertuduhan tersebut hanya
ditimbulkan dalam pliding syarikat buat kali pertama – Kesannya – Sama ada
penubuhan MMS tersebut tergolong dalam salah laku "conflict of interest" – Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Kesannya – Syarikat gagal memberikan beliau amaran atau mengeluarkan
surat tunjuk sebab kepada beliau – Kesannya – Sama ada beliau dinafikan
peluang untuk menjawab kepada pertuduhan tersebut – Sama ada
pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan secara adil dan bersebab – Akta
Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5) SIASATAN DALAMAN Nota prosiding – Sama ada harus diambil kira dalam kes ini – Faktor-faktor
yang harus diambil kira – Keterangan yang dikemukakan – Kesannya |
||
|
