AWARD

This matter involved the dismissal of Encik Raja Musa bin Raja Majid by his employer Heveafil Sdn Bhd on 31 March 2000 and had been referred to the Industrial Court for an award under s. 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 .

The case was first mentioned before the Assistant Registrar Puan Rashidah on 24 December 2002 and dates of hearing had been fixed for 30 and 31 July 2003. The former learned Chairman Puan Lau Bee Lan had been elevated to the High Court in Kuching in May 2003 and the case was therefore postponed.

The case was first mentioned before the present chairman on 15 April 2004 and although the pleadings were in order except for the witness statements, the Court directed that parties attempt to find an amicable settlement before litigating the matter. Court set 28 May 2004 for case management.

The parties were represented by Wan Muhammad Amin for the company and Ms Reena Enbasegaram for the claimant. Court also directed that at the next case management session both counsels were to have ready before the Court:-

a. All disputed facts clearly stated.

b. All the legal issues to be tried.

c. Counsels are to report to Court about the "road blocks" that are preventing an amicable settlement in the course of their negotiations.

At the case management session on 22 November 2004 after several earlier sessions both counsels informed that Court that they were close to resolving the dispute and requested Court for two more weeks.

Court adjourned the matter to 8 December 2004 whereupon at this meeting the company's counsels informed Court that the matter had been resolved between his client and the claimant and that payment had been made by the company to the claimant in full and final settlement. Claimant's counsel informed Court that they needed until the next day to confirm with their client and requested Court to stand down case till the next day. Court stood down the case to the next day.

When both counsel re-assembled in Court on the following day claimant's counsel informed Court that they were unable to contact their client and requested for a few days to locate their client as they have no instruction to withdrawn the case at this stage.

The Court fixed 13 December 2004 for decision to be made if claimant's counsel is unable to locate his client. When Court re-assembled on 13 December 2004 both counsels informed Court that their respective clients have amicably resolved the dispute and requested that the terms of settlement be not disclosed except that the matter was amicably resolved with no admission of liability on the part of the company. Claimant's counsel requested that the case be withdrawn with no liberty to file afresh.

Court accordingly records the abovementioned terms in a consent award.