Back
INDUSTRIAL COURT KUALA LUMPUR
LOGEBALEN VEJIAIIRAM – Appellant
Versus
TAV FACILITY SOLUTION (M) SDN BHD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. reference and procedural history of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. factual matrix regarding the claimant's employment and termination. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. claimant's arguments against the termination. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. documents filed for trial. (Para 13) |
| 5. role of the industrial court in dismissal cases. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. standard of proof in dismissal cases. (Para 17 , 19) |
| 7. law on ex-parte hearings. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 8. court's evaluation of evidence presented. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 9. court's findings on the dismissal's just cause. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 10. discussion on withholding salaries as a breach of contract. (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 11. remedies awarded to the claimant. (Para 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 12. conclusion and order of the court. (Para 36 , 37) |
Reference
[1] This is a reference dated 18 February 2022 made under s 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 ("the Act") arising out of the dismissal of LOGEBALEN VEJIAIIRAM (hereinafter referred to as "the Claimant") by TAV FACILITY SOLUTION (M) SDN BHD (hereinafter referred to as "the Company") on 17 June 2021.
[2] The reference in this case required the Court to hea
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
