Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Retrenchment

Legal area

Court

22 Oct 2024

LEE KHURN YING 1. ) MMSB CONSULT SDN BHD 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

Citation

W-01(A)-604-11/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

A
Case number

W-01(A)-604-11/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the High Court was correct to quash the Industrial Court Awards: the Industrial Court erred in law by requiring clause 14 conditions or client approval to find redundancy and by failing to assess whether the MOF-mandated cost optimization and bona fide restructuring had produced a genuine redundancy (fewer employees required to perform the work); therefore the High Court decision upholding the Applicant's lawful retrenchment was affirmed and the appeals dismissed.
22 Oct 2024

MOHAMAD NAZLY BIN NASIR MOHAMAD 1. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA 2. ) MMSB CONSULT SDN BHD

Citation

W-01(A)-607-11/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

A
Case number

W-01(A)-607-11/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Industrial Court erred as a matter of law and fact by adopting a restrictive interpretation of clause 14 and failing to apply the correct legal test for redundancy; the MOF cost optimisation and consequent bona fide restructuring legitimately reduced the employer's workforce requirements so a genuine redundancy existed, therefore the High Court correctly quashed the Industrial Court Awards and its decision is upheld.
14 Nov 2023

LOURDES MEDICAL SERVICES SDN BHD 1. ) LALITHA A/P SUBRAMANIAM 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

Citation

WA-25-378-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-378-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Employer failed to discharge burden of proving actual redundancy with concrete contemporaneous evidence; retrenchment was made hastily (within two weeks of MCO) and was tainted by arbitrariness and capriciousness; Industrial Court's finding that dismissal was without just cause is upheld and judicial review dismissed.
14 Nov 2023

LOURDES MEDICAL SERVICES SDN BHD 1. ) MOHAMAD SAHRUL BIN KAHULAN 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

Citation

WA-25-376-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-376-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Employer failed to discharge the burden of proving actual redundancy: retrenchment was effected hastily (within two weeks of MCO), contemporaneous documentary evidence was lacking, workload was taken over by another employee, and an offer of reinstatement months later confirmed the absence of genuine redundancy; therefore Industrial Court's finding that dismissal was without just cause or excuse stands and there was no reviewable error warranting interference by the High Court.
14 Nov 2023

LOURDES MEDICAL SERVICES SDN BHD 1. ) RASALECHUMI A/P KANAGARATNAM 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

Citation

WA-25-379-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-379-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held that the Industrial Court did not err: the employer failed to prove actual redundancy or produce contemporaneous evidence; the retrenchment was hastily executed and undermined by evidence that the employee's duties were taken over and by a subsequent offer of reinstatement; therefore the dismissals were without just cause or excuse and the Industrial Court awards stand.
14 Nov 2023

LOURDES MEDICAL SERVICES SDN BHD 1. ) GAWRI A/P MUTHADAKAN 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

Citation

WA-25-377-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-377-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The employer failed to discharge the burden of proving actual redundancy with concrete evidence; the retrenchment was made hastily and on conjecture, and the dismissed employee's duties were assumed by others; therefore the Industrial Court correctly found no justification for dismissal and its Awards stand; the judicial review applications are dismissed.
25 Oct 2023

ENSOFT CONSULTING SDN BHD 1. ) UPPALAPATI SITA RAMA RAJU 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

Citation

WA-25-249-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-249-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court dismissed the judicial review because the applicant failed to plead and adduce evidence to discharge the burden of proving bona fide redundancy; the Industrial Court's factual findings, based on unrebutted oral and documentary evidence and witness credibility, were not amenable to judicial review, and therefore the Award was lawful and upheld.
29 Nov 2022

OSRAM OPTO SEMICONDUCTORS (MALAYSIA) SDN. BHD. 1. ) OOI MEI CHEIN @ WEI MEI CHEIN 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

Citation

P-01(A)-525-09/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

A
Case number

P-01(A)-525-09/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal held the Industrial Court's finding of genuine redundancy was irrational and unsupported because the appellant's own documents showed the employee's duties remained and were merely redistributed; accordingly the High Court correctly quashed the Industrial Court Award. However, reinstatement after a six‑year lapse and breakdown of mutual trust would not be conducive to industrial harmony, so reinstatement was varied to compensation in lieu (RM804,650), High Court award of back wages (RM772,464) and punitive damages (RM50,000) were affirmed, and costs awarded (RM15,000).
26 Jul 2022

B. Braun Medical Industries Sdn Bhd 1. ) Mugunthan a/l Vadiveloo 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

Citation

AA-25-2-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AA-25-2-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court dismissed the judicial review because the Industrial Court correctly found the MSS was presented alongside a retrenchment package which vitiated voluntariness and amounted to dismissal, the applicant failed to prove actual redundancy or the bona fides of restructuring, and the Industrial Court’s factual findings based on credibility were not plainly wrong.
8 Mar 2022

WONG MENG KOON 1. ) MALAYSIAN MOSAICS SDN. BHD. 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

Citation

WA-25-265-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-265-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court dismissed the judicial review applications, upholding the Industrial Court's factual findings that the employer proved financial losses and a bona fide reorganisation leading to genuine redundancy; credibility findings and acceptance of audited accounts were not susceptible to judicial review and no mala fide was shown.