Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Judicial review of industrial court awards

  • 21 Oct 2025

    Hubline Berhad 1. ) Danny Ng Hean Tee & 20 Orang Lagi 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA 3. ) Highline Shipping Sdn Bhd

    Citation
    W-01(A)-128-03/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
    Court
    A
    Case number
    W-01(A)-128-03/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

    Appeals allowed. The Industrial Court erred in ordering substitution of Hubline and joinder of Highline under s.29(a) on the basis of the asserted nexus alone. Section 29(a) must be applied consistent with fundamental company law: mere factual or legal nexus is insufficient to displace separate legal personality. Piercing the corporate veil is exceptional and requires credible evidence of impropriety or assumption of liability (per Keller/Prest). The Claimants failed to meet that threshold and the Industrial Court Awards No.130 and No.131 of 2019 are quashed.

    • Joinder and substitution of parties under s.29(a) ira 1967
    • Piercing the corporate veil
    • Industrial court procedural powers
    • Judicial review of industrial court awards
    • Separate legal personality (salomon)

  • 22 Oct 2024

    CHAIRIL BAHARI BIN IBRAHIM 1. ) MMSB CONSULT SDN BHD 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

    Citation
    W-01(A)-608-11/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
    Court
    A
    Case number
    W-01(A)-608-11/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

    The Court held the Industrial Court erred in law by construing clause 14 restrictively and failing to apply the correct legal test for redundancy; the Ministry of Finance cost-optimization and project restructuring legitimately reduced the employer's workforce needs such that bona fide redundancy arose and the High Court was correct to quash the Industrial Court Awards.

    • Redundancy/retrenchment
    • Fixed-term contract termination
    • Judicial review of industrial court awards
    • Selection criteria for redundancy
    • Interpretation of termination clauses

  • 30 Nov 2021

    Muehbaeur Tehnologies Sdn Bhd Chan Shee Chuen

    Citation
    PA-25-25-04/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    PA-25-25-04/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    High Court allowed judicial review, holding the Industrial Court committed errors of law by failing to consider contractual terms, job description and contemporaneous emails establishing the training as mandatory, by misapplying the legal test for insubordination and by disregarding evidence that the Respondent wilfully and openly refused to comply; dismissal was held to be justified and the Industrial Court award set aside.

    • Insubordination and misconduct
    • Judicial review of industrial court awards
    • Training obligations under contract
    • Domestic inquiry status
    • Certiorari

  • 1 Jan 1900

    ANSELL INDUSTRIAL & SPECIALTY GLOVES MALAYSIA SDN BHD 1. LIM IM TEE 2. MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

    Citation
    PA-25-43-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    PA-25-43-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court quashed the Industrial Court Award because the finding that Ansell re‑employed Lim as a permanent employee until age 60 was unsupported by evidence and irrational; Lim had retired, accepted retirement benefits and voluntarily entered post‑retirement fixed‑term contracts which superseded any prior negotiations, and ostensible authority was improperly applied where there was no conduct by the principal to indicate approval of an agent binding the company to permanent employment.

    • Unfair dismissal
    • Retirement age
    • Ostensible/apparent authority
    • Minimum retirement age act 2012
    • Judicial review of industrial court awards
    • Contract supersession