Back
2024 MarsdenLR 1203
INDUSTRIAL COURT PENANG
TEH JUN REN – Appellant
Versus
ASTINO AGRO-HOUSE MULTI SYSTEM SDN BHD – Respondent
Award No: 1650 Of 2024 [Case No. 18/4-309/23]
The dismissal of an employee must be substantiated with clear evidence of misconduct; failure to do so constitutes unjust dismissal.
Headnote:(A) Industrial Relations Act 1967 - Section 20(3) - Dismissal of employee - Claimant dismissed for alleged misconduct related to project management and communication failures - Claimant contended dismissal was without just cause - Court found no misconduct established and dismissal was victimization. (Paras 102, 104)
(B) Evidence - Standard of proof - Employer bears burden to prove dismissal was with just cause - Civil standard of balance of probabilities applies. (Paras 29, 30)
Facts of the case:
The Claimant, a Sales Manager, was dismissed on 5 April 2022 after being accused of misconduct related to a project involving DPDC. The Company claimed the dismissal was justified due to the Claimant's negligence in project management. (Paras 1-12)
Findings of Court:
The Court found the Company failed to prove the misconduct claims against the Claimant, concluding the dismissal was without just cause and constituted victimization. (Paras 102-104)
Issues: The main issues were whether the Claimant committed the alleged misconduct and whether the dismissal was justified. (Paras 31)
Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that the evidence did not support the Company's claims of misconduct, emphasizing the importance of proper project management and communication procedures. (Paras 102-104)
Result: The Court ordered the Company to pay RM119,560.00 to the Claimant as compensation. (Paras 120)
AWARD
Reference
[1] This is a reference made on 27 January 2023 by the Director General of Industrial Relations Department to the Industrial Court of Malaysia under s 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 ('the Act') arising out of the dismissal of TEH JUN REN (hereinafter referred to as 'the Claimant') by ASTINO AGRO-HOUSE MULTI SYSTEM Sdn Bhd (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company'). The Ministerial reference in this case before the Court requires the Court to hear and determine the Claimant's complaint of dismissal by the Company on 05 April 2022.
Brief Background Facts Of The Case
[2] The Claimant's pleaded case as contained in his Statement of Case dated 3 June 2023 was that he joined the Company as a Sales Executive (II) on 13 August 2019 with a monthly salary of RM2,800.00 and at the material time of his dismissal he was holding the position as a Sales Manager and his last drawn salary was RM2,912.00 with Car Allowance of RM1,500.00, Target Allowance of RM1,488.00 and Travelling Allowance of RM200.00.
[3] The Claimant pleaded that sometime in August 2020, he was assigned to oversee a project involving a company known as Dindings Poultry Development Centre Sdn Bhd (hereinafter referred to as 'DPDC'). The Contract Agreement between the Company and DPDC was signed sometime in May 2021.
[4] It was pleaded that sometime in August 2020, one Mr. Chuah Chin Sun, who is the Director of the Company had informed in a meeting with the Chief Operating Officer of the Company, Mr. Chin Shiau Chiea (a.k.a Edvent Chin) and Mr. Choo Wei Chung from the Company's Engineering Department about the DPDC project and had instructed Mr. Choo Wei Chung and his team to draft the plan of the structure for the said project as required by DPDC (hereinafter referred to as 'the project'). According to the Claimant, the DPDC project comprised of two (2) structures consisting of two single story (2) broiler houses at Segari, Lumut, Perak (hereinafter referred as to 'broiler houses').
[5] The Claimant pleaded and stated that the drawing of the plan of the broiler houses were completed by the Engineering Department and was submitted to Mr. Chuah Chin Sun for approval and was thereafter sent to the DPDC for approval and in May 2021 the project was agreed and concluded by the Company and DPDC by signing an agreement.
[6] After which, the Claimant pleaded that on the instruction of Mr. Chuah Chin Sun he had sent out two (2) letters of commitment dated 12 May 2021 and 17 May 2021 to DPDC in respect of the broiler houses performance and its temperature which was copied to Mr. Chuah Chin Sun.
[7] After the signing of the agreement, the Claimant pleaded that he had overseen the project and updated Mr. Chuah Chin Sun about the project and he was never notified of any complaint either by Mr. Chuah Chin Sun or DPDC regarding the said project.
[8] Further, the Claimant pleaded that he accompanied Mr. Chuah Chin Sun and Mr. Chin Shiau Chiea to the meetings with DPDC and all the decisions in respect of the said project was made by them and that he had only followed the instructions given to him.
[9] The Claimant pleaded and stated that he was issued a suspension letter dated 18 March 2022 on the grounds of poor performance and misconduct and thereafter was suspended for a period of fourteen (14) days with half salary.
[10] The Claimant then pleaded that via letter dated 24 March 2022, the Claimant was required to attend a domestic inquiry on 1 April 2022 to answer the charges of poor performance and misconduct and stated that he had attended the inquiry on 1 April 2022 and denied charges levelled against him.
[11] The Claimant stated that thereafter by way of a letter dated 4 April 2022 he was dismissed from employment by the Company effective from 5 April 2022. He pleaded that via letter dated 6 April 2022, he stated his disagreement with decision of the Company to dismiss him from employment.
[12] On his dismissal by the Company, the Claimant co
