The employer bears the burden to prove just cause for dismissal; failure to do so results in a ruling in favor of the employee and potential compensation.

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 hear and determine the Claimant's complaint of dismissal by the Company on 17 June 2021. Hearing proceeded and concluded before Chairman of this division of Court 21 on 23 September 2022 pursuant to the instructions from the learned President of the Industrial Court of Malaysia in order for a final award be handed down.

Procedural History

[3] Having received the reference by the Director General of Industrial Department dated 18 February 2022 pursuant to s 20(3) of the Industrial Relation Act 1967, this Court had proceeded to fix a date for mention for 5 April 2022 in which the parties to the proceeding were duly informed of the mention date vide Form F dated 7 March 2022 sent via A R registered post.

[4] Before the Assistant Registrar ("AR") on 5 April 2022 which was fixed by way of e-mention, Mr Krishnan, a Representative of MTUC who was present for the claimant, informed the Court that Form B (Warrant of Authority) would be filed later. The claimant was also present during the said e-mention. The Company was absent.

[5] The AR proceeded to fix the dates for filings of the Statement of Case 26 April 2022), Statement in Reply (17 May 2022), Rejoinder (25 May 2022) Witness Statements as well as Bundles of Documents (20 April 2023), and dates for hearing (8 May 2023 and 9 May 2023). Mr Krishnan was present on a mention date on 26 August 2022 to update the Court on the status of the company since the company had been absent on the 5 previous mention dates. The claimant had diligently extracted and provided to this Court a SSM search report dated 26 July 2022 which shows that the status of the company is existing. By way of Form G dated 26 August 2022 (Notis Perbicaraan) sent by personal service on both parties, the company and the claimant were informed by the Court that hearing date for the matter had been rescheduled to 23 September 2022.

[6] Based on the above timeline, the company had been sufficiently informed of the hearing dates fixed for this case. There is no excuse for the Company failing to turn up in Court for hearing on 23 September 2022. Hence, the hearing was ordered to proceed Ex-Parte on 23 September 2022 pursuant to s 29(d) of the IRA 1967. In relation to this, the Court is guided by the case of Lee Mei Wan v. Ultimate Media Group Pte Ltd 2017 MarsdenLR 2714 .

Factual Matrix

[7] The Claimant commenced employment with the Company on 10 February 2020 as a Building Maintenance Technician and was paid monthly basic salary of RM2300 with fixed allowance of RM300 per month. The claimant's last drawn salary is RM2500 together with fixed allowance of RM300 prior to his termination that took effect on 30 June 2021. The Letter of Appointment dated 10 February 2020 was issued to the Claimant and acknowledged by him much later ie on 27 February 2020. (CLB-