The court determined that claims of wrongful dismissal and oppression must be rooted in the capacity of the party as either an employee or shareholder, establishing the legal boundaries for each.

JUDGMENT

(Originating Summons Order 7 Rule 3 And Order 92 Rule 4 ROC 2012)

Christopher Chin Soo Yin J:

Preliminaries

[1] The plaintiff filed and Originating Summons seeking this Court's declarations on several issues against the defendants. The originating Summons and its grounds nicely summarise the grievances of the plaintiff and thus the facts as alleged by the plaintiff, giving rise to this dispute.

[2] The declarations sought were:

1. A declaration that the Deceased and/or the 2nd defendant has wrongfully and/or unlawfully terminated the plaintiff as the workshop manager on 3 June 2020;

2. A declaration that the Deceased and/or the 2nd defendant had exercised their control in the 3rd defendant's management and operation and acted against the best interests of the 3rd defendant and bringing mala fide action against the plaintiff in terminating the plaintiff's employment for their own personal gains and motives;

3. A declaration that the Deceased and/or the 2nd defendant had acted in breach of their fiduciary duties and statutory duties as the directors of the company in refusing and/or failing to provide the plaintiff with a copy of the 3rd defendant's financial accounts and/or books as one of the shareholders of the 3rd defendant;

4. That the defendants do pay the plaintiff a sum for such period and for such amount to be assessed by the Deputy Registrar being compensation for the unfair wrongful and/or unlawful termination;

5. That the 3rd defendant is to repay and reimburse to the plaintiff the total sum of Ringgit Malaysia Sixty-One Thousand One Hundred Twenty-Four and Eighty-Nine Cents (RM61,124-89) Only, being advancements made by the plaintiff to the 3rd defendant to pay for the 3rd defendant's expenses and outgoings;

6. That the Deceased/or 2nd defendant shall purchase all the ten per centum (10%) shares held by the plaintiff at a fair value of the 3rd defendant as at the date of this Order or any such date as this Honourable Court may order and consequently, an Order that:

(a) A qualified auditor jointly agreed by all the parties or alternatively, if no such appointment can be agreed by the parties, a qualified auditor as this Honourable Court deems fit be appointed as special auditors in the examination of the accounts and records including the management accounts of the 3rd defendant and to provide valuation report(s) for the purpose of share valuation; and

(b) All costs incurred in the appointment of the auditors for the purpose stated in Paragraph (a) aforementioned are to be borne by the 3rd defendant and be paid within fourteen (14) days from the presentation of the bills thereof or in such manner as this Honourable Court deems fit.

7. Alternatively, to Prayer (vi) above, an Order that the 3rd defendant be wound up;

8. That the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants do pay to the plaintiff the costs of this Originating Summons;

9. Interest on any damages and/or compensations awarded at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of this Originating Summons until full and final settlement;

10. Costs; and

11. Such further and/or other orders or relief as this Honourable Court shall deem fit and proper.

[3] The grounds of the application are:

1. That the Deceased and/or the 2nd defendant had planned and schemed to terminate the employment of the plaintiff with the 3rd defendant on 3 June 2020 by wrongfully alleging that the plaintiff had failed to turn up for work on 1st and 2 June 2020 during the Gawai festive season;

2. That the Deceased and/or 2nd defendant had terminated the plaintiff's employment without proper procedures and against the Labour Ordinance;

3. The Deceased and/or the 2nd defendant had also deliberately and wilfully refused to pay the sum of Ringgit Malaysia Sixty-One Thousand One Hundred Twenty-Four and Eighty-Nine Cents (RM61,124-89) to the plaintiff being the advancement made by the plaintiff to the 3rd defendant for its outgoings and expenses from year 2014 to year 2019 which is still due and owing to the plaintiff;

4. That the