7-ELEVEN MALAYSIA SDN. BHD. ASHVINE A/P HARI KRISHNAN

7-ELEVEN MALAYSIA SDN. BHD. ASHVINE A/P HARI KRISHNAN

The Court allowed the employer's appeal, holding that the respondent's claim in the civil courts for substantial damages grounded in constructive dismissal was an abuse of process because the statutory dispute resolution mechanism under the Industrial Relations Act 1967 should have been invoked; common law damages are limited and the High Court should not usurp the Industrial Court's statutory role, therefore the Writ and Statement of Claim were struck out and dismissed.

Citation
W-02(IM)(NCvC)-629-04/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: 7-Eleven Malaysia Sdn Bhd; Respondent: Ashvine Hari Krishnan
Court
IM
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 March 2023
Case Number
W-02(IM)(NCvC)-629-04/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Appeal From High Court Decision on Strike Out Application Under Order 18 R.19 ROC
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside; Writ and Statement of Claim struck out and dismissed
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Abuse of Process, Jurisdiction of Civil Courts Vs Industrial Court, Statutory Remedies Under Industrial Relations Act, Damages Assessment
Source Language
Malay/English
Employment Law Civil Procedure Contract Law Tort Industrial Relations Law Constructive Dismissal Abuse of Process Jurisdiction of Civil Courts Vs Industrial Court +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

7-Eleven Malaysia Sdn Bhd

Appellant

Ashvine Hari Krishnan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Appeal From High Court Decision on Strike Out Application Under Order 18 R.19 ROC

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an employee may pursue a common law claim for constructive dismissal and large damages in the civil courts instead of invoking the statutory remedy under s.20 Industrial Relations Act 1967
  2. 2 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain such a common law claim when statutory machinery exists
  3. 3 Whether the pleaded tort claims (emotional distress, harassment, negligence in appointment) are maintainable separately or subsumed into constructive dismissal

Ratio Decidendi

The Court allowed the employer's appeal, holding that the respondent's claim in the civil courts for substantial damages grounded in constructive dismissal was an abuse of process because the statutory dispute resolution mechanism under the Industrial Relations Act 1967 should have been invoked; common law damages are limited and the High Court should not usurp the Industrial Court's statutory role, therefore the Writ and Statement of Claim were struck out and dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside; Writ and Statement of Claim struck out and dismissed

Orders

  • Enclosure 9 allowed
  • Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim dated 26 October 2021 struck out and dismissed