YONG PUI YEE vs MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA & ANOR AND ANOTHER CASE

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 MarsdenLR 1851

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
YONG PUI YEE – Appellant
Versus
MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA & ANOR AND ANOTHER CASE – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Edward Saw Keat Leong,Megan Choo Wen Shin,Lew Kang Ying ,Respondent Advocate: Yong Hon Cheong

Table of Content
1. judicial review applications overview. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. details of the cimb fusion programme. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. industrial court's approach to dismissal. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
4. grounds of review by the applicant. (Para 17)
5. judicial review grounds and permissible scope. (Para 18 , 19)
6. interpretation of the programme document. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
7. determining the nature of contracts. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)
8. management prerogative in trainee assessment. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39)
9. clarification on the letter dated 10 august 2015. (Para 40 , 41)

Amarjeet Singh Serjit Singh J:

Introduction

[1] This judgment concerns two applications for judicial review that emanated from two separate awards of the Industrial Court i.e Award No 4 of 2021 [[2021] MELRU 4] and Award No 5 of 2021 [[2021] 1 MELR 482] handed down on 4 January 2021. The Industrial Court had dismissed the claims of dismissal without just cause and excuse in both proceedings in which the awards were made.

[2] The judicial review applications were commenced by Yong Pui Yee, the applicant (at times referred to as trainee in certain doc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 MarsdenLR 1851

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPURYONG PUI YEE – AppellantVersusMAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA & ANOR AND ANOTHER CASE – Respondent

Cases Referred (5)

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
YONG PUI YEE – Appellant
Versus
MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA & ANOR AND ANOTHER CASE – Respondent