The court clarified the essential criteria for establishing employer-employee relationships, emphasizing the importance of documentary evidence and legal principles in judicial review proceedings.

Introduction

[1] The Applicant filed an application for a judicial review proceeding (encl 8) under O 53 of the Rules of 2012 ( ROC ) to seek the following reliefs:

1.1 Suatu perintah certiorari untuk membatalkan seluruh keputusan Mahkamah Perusahaan yang terkandung dalam Awad No 1745 Tahun 2020 bertarikh 9 Disember 2020;

1.2 Secara alternatif dan tanpa prejudis terhadap permohonan Pemohon dalam perkara (1.1) di atas, bagi suatu perintah certiorari untuk membatalkan sebahagian keputusan Mahkamah Perusahaan yang terkandung dalam Awad No 1745 Tahun 2020 bertarikh 9 Disember 2020 di mana Mahkamah Perusahaan telah mengawadkan Responden Pertama dengan jumlah keseluruhan RM765,654.56 sebagai gaji kebelakangan dan pampasan galang ganti pengembalian semula; dan

1.3 Suatu perintah bahawa semua prosiding selanjutnya untuk menguatkuasakan seluruh keputusan Mahkamah Perusahaan Awad No 1745 Tahun 2020 bertarikh 9 Disember 2020 berkenaan perintah gaji kebelakangan dan pampasan galang ganti pengembalian semula sebanyak RM765,654.56, termasuk apa-apa prosiding lanjutan di bawah Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967 dan/atau tindakan atau permohonan di bawah s 464 dan 465 Akta Syarikat 2016 atau apa-apa langkah atau prosiding atau permohonan berkenaan Awad No 1745 Tahun 2020 bertarikh 9 Disember 2020 digantung sementara menunggu keputusan terakhir permohonan ini;

1.4 Kos dan kos sampingan permohonan ini adalah kos mengikut kausa; dan

1.5 Apa-apa relif lain yang Mahkamah ini fikir suai manfaat.

[2] In gist, the Applicant is seeking:

a) An order of certiorari to quash the decision of the Industrial Court Award No 1745 of 2020 dated 9 December 2020 which is in favor of Wan Abdul Hamid bin Wan Abdul Rahman, the First Respondent; and/or

b) In the alternative an order of certiorari to quash partially Award No 1745 of 2020 dated 9 December 2020 made by the Industrial Court vide Case No: 14/4-1803/19 (Award).

[3] After the hearing, I allowed the Applicant's judicial review application (encl 8) and my full grounds now follow.

Background Facts

[4] The background facts gathered from the cause papers, Affidavit in Support and submissions of the parties can be summarized as follows:

4.1 The First Respondent commenced employment with ACP Industries Bhd as a Technical Sales Manager vide letter of offer dated 7 June 2002;

4.2 In 2006, MTD Equity Sdn Bhd acquired ACP Industries Bhd (now known as MTD ACPI Engineering Berhad) (Group Company) whereby the Applicant is part of the Group Company. ACP Industries Berhad (now known as MTD ACPI Engineering Berhad) and MTD Capital Bhd are collectively referred to as the MTD Group of Companies. ACP-DMT Sdn Bhd is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Saujanika Sdn Bhd, which in turn is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of MTD Capital Bhd Hence ACP-DMT Sdn Bhd is part of MTD Group of Companies;

4.3 In 2009, the First Respondent was designated as the Vice President, Manufacturing Operations and later re-designated to as Vice President of Manufacturing (Business Development & Operation Support) of the Business Development and Manufacturing Division in 2011;

4.4 In 2012, the First Respondent formed part of a team sent to Saudi Arabia by the Applicant for a fact-finding mission. The First Respondent was appointed as the leader of the fact-finding team. Each team member was given various tasks to obtain information and to meet relevant parties ie business partners, relevant authorities etc for the purposes of setting up a company in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia;

4.5 Under the visit by the team led by the First Respondent, MTD Capital Al Saudia Co LLC (MTD Capital Al Saudia)