Back
2025 MarsdenLR 6097
INDUSTRIAL COURT KUALA LUMPUR
MOHD SHAHRIL HUSSIN – Appellant
Versus
MAASDOTS SDN BHD – Respondent
Award No: 436 Of 2025 [Case No: 15/4-992/23]
The court established that a valid Mutual Separation Agreement did not exist, and the employer's unilateral actions constituted a fundamental breach of the employment contract, leading to constructive dismissal.
Headnote:(A) Industrial Relations Act 1967 - Section 20(3) - Constructive dismissal - Dispute over termination of employment based on alleged Mutual Separation Agreement - Claimant denied entering into such agreement, asserting constructive dismissal due to unilateral termination by employer - Court evaluated evidence and found no valid agreement existed, ruling that the employer's actions constituted a fundamental breach of contract. (Paras 1, 3, 26, 90)
(B) Constructive Dismissal - Definition and principles - Constructive dismissal occurs when an employee resigns due to employer's repudiatory breach of contract - Employee must prove fundamental breach by employer to claim constructive dismissal. (Paras 27, 39, 90)
Facts of the case:
The Claimant was dismissed by the Company on 31 October 2022, purportedly under a Mutual Separation Agreement which he denied agreeing to, claiming constructive dismissal instead. (Paras 4, 90)
Findings of Court:
The Court found that the Claimant did not agree to the Mutual Separation Agreement and that the Company's actions amounted to a fundamental breach of the employment contract. (Paras 70, 90)
Issues: The main issues were whether a valid Mutual Separation Agreement existed and whether the Claimant was constructively dismissed. (Paras 3, 4)
Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that the Claimant did not consent to the Mutual Separation Agreement, and the Company's unilateral actions constituted a fundamental breach of the employment contract, justifying the Claimant's claim of constructive dismissal. (Paras 70, 90)
Result: The Court awarded the Claimant RM382,000.00 as compensation for constructive dismissal.
AWARD
A. Reference
[1] This is a reference from the Director General for Industrial Relations to the Industrial Court of Malaysia under s 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 ("the IRA 1967") as amended by the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2020 (A 1615), in respect of the dismissal of Mohd Shahril Bin Hussin ("the Claimant") by his employer, Maasdots Sdn Bhd ("the Company") on 31 October 2022.
B. Case Summary And Proceedings
[2] The dispute in our present case is over the termination of the Claimant's employment, purportedly pursuant to a Mutual Separation Agreement.
[3] The main issue for the Court 's determination is whether the parties entered into a valid and binding Mutual Separation Agreement that lawfully and effectively terminated the Claimant's employment with the Company by mutual consent.
[4] The Claimant denied entering into any Mutual Separation Agreement and asserted that the Company's unilateral imposition of his departure on 31 October 2022, purportedly based on an alleged Mutual Separation Agreement to which he had never agreed, amounted to constructive dismissal.
[5] As with all other constructive dismissal cases, where the fact of dismissal is disputed, the Claimant began his case against the Company at the commencement of the trial.
[6] The Claimant did not call any other witnesses to give evidence at the trial. Only the Claimant gave evidence at the trial in support of his case against the Company.
[7] Upon the conclusion of the Claimant's case, the Company commenced its' case by calling the following people to give evidence in support of the Company's case against the Claimant.
(a) Ismail Bin Mohd Noor ("COW1") who was the Chief Executive Officer of the Group Companies of Bestinet Sdn Bhd;
(b) Muqri Bin Mohd Sofian (COW2) who was the Head of Human Resource of the Group Companies of Bestinet Sdn Bhd;
(c) Kunal Tayal (COW3) who was the Chief Financial Officer of the Group Companies of Bestinet Sdn Bhd; and
(d) Aminul Islam Bin Abdul Nor (COW4) who was the Founder and Group President of the Group Companies of Bestinet Sdn Bhd.
[8] The following cause papers and documents have been filed and/or marked as evidence before the Court and were referred to during the proceedings:
(a) The Claimant's Statement of Case dated 31 July 2023;
(b) The Company's Statement In Reply dated 21 August 2023;
(c) The Claimant's Rejoinder dated 1 September 2023;
(d) The Claimant's Bundle of Documents ("CLB1");
(e) The Claimant's Supplementary Bundle of Documents ("CLB2");
(f) The Company's Bundle of Documents ("Respondent's Additional Bundle of Documents) ("COB1");
(g) The Company's Bundle of Documents ("Respondent's Additional Bundle of Documents - 2") ("COB3");
(h) The Witness Statement of Mohd Shahril bin Hussin ("the Claimant") ("CLWS1");
(i) The Company's Witness Statement of Ismail bin Mohd Noor ("COWS1");
(x) The Company's Witness Statement of Muqri Bin Mohd Sofian ("COWS2");
(xi) The Company's Witness Statement of Kunal Tayal ("COWS3"); and
(xii) Witness Statement of Aminul Islam Bin Abdul Nor ("COWS4").
C. Salient Facts
[9] The Company is principally engaged in the business of providing technical information technology and computer services, know-hows and process of industrial engineering, in particular for goods and services to facilitate travelers' health screening system such a COVID-19. It is an entity within the Group of Companies of Bestinet Sdn Bhd.
[10] By a letter of appointment dated 27 July 2020 ("the Letter of Appointment"), the Claimant was employed by the Company as a Chief Operating Officer commencing on 1 August 2020.
[11] The Claimant was required to undergo a probationary period of six (6) months from the date of commencement of the employment. He completed the probationary period and was confirmed in his employment vide letter dated 31 March 2021.
[12] Throughout the Claimant's employment with the Company, he was directly involved in various projects and/or project proposals, including:
(a)
