Employment dismissal requires just cause, with the employer bearing the burden of proof for misconduct.

The Reference

[1] Azrizal bin Ali ("the claimant") was defenestrated from his erstwhile service at Sime Darby Auto Hyundai Sdn Bhd ("the company") with effect from 18 June 2015.

[2] Being aggrieved by the circumstances surrounding this defenestration from employment, the claimant made written representations on 10 August 2015 to the Director General for Industrial Relations under s 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 ("the Act"); that is, within 60 days of the dismissal, as provided under s 20(1A) of the Act.

[3] The conciliatory exertions undertaken by the Director General's office failed; and for that reason the Honourable Minister of Human Resources, Malaysia was duly notified of the fruitless reconciliation process, under s 20(2) of the Act.

[4] After receipt of this notification and its ancillary papers; and by virtue of s 20(3) of the Act, the Honourable Minister found it fit to exercise those powers under that section to refer this matter to the Industrial Court of Malaysia for deliberation and final disposal.

[5] As a consequence, the claimant's initial representations were transformed into a ministerial reference for the issuance of an award by this Court.

[6] The said ministerial order was dated 15 August 2016; and this order was received by the Court's Registry at Kuala Lumpur on 5 September 2016.

The Proceedings

[7] Following a number of mention dates fixed between 13 October 2016 and 4 January 2018; for administrative and file management purposes; the trial of this matter commenced on 17 January 2018 before Court No 22, presiding in Kuala Lumpur.

[8] Evidence was recorded from two witnesses for the company on the day.

[9] The hearing then continued into 18 January 2018 and 26 January 2018, where the testimony of one more company witness was recorded; which was followed by the case for the claimant; where he was the sole witness on his own behalf.

[10] Having been examined on the latter stated date, he was cross-examined and re-examined on 12 February 2018; after which the claimant closed his case.

[11] A written submission for the company was filed on 3 April 2018; while one for the claimant was submitted on 3 May 2018, with a follow-up written submission for the claimant filed on 30 May 2018. The company then filed a reply on 5 June 2018.

[12] All that remains for this Court to do now, is to hand down its formal award - which it does by this:

The Factual Matrix

[13] The claimant commenced employment as an "Assembler in Grade 3" on RM2.20 per hour on or about 13 March 1995, at the Production Department of Associated Motor Industries (a member of the Tractors Malaysia Group), at its Shah Alam Plant. He was confirmed in his appointment on or about 13 June 1995. On or about 22 January 2008, the claimant was offered employment with Inokom Corporation Sdn Bhd (a member of the Sime Darby Group) as an "Operator - BMW Project"; at a monthly basic salary of RM2,496.00 with effect from 1 July 2008, which he accepted. The effect of this acceptance was that his employment with Associated Motor Industries (now also a member of the Sime Darby Group) ceased with effect from the said date [see document on p 10 of bundle marked "A"]. Sometime on or about 1 August 2009, vide a letter dated 12 August 2009, he was transferred to Hyundai-Sime Darby Motors Sdn Bhd. His designation at this new position was that of an "Officer - Sales Admin (Job Grade A03) - Commercial Operations"; at a monthly salary of RM2,564.00. With effect from 25 February 2014, the claimant was again transferred, and this time to Sime Darby Auto Hyundai Sdn Bhd (the respondent company in the instant case) as an "Officer - Admin (Supervisory II Job Grade)" earning a basic monthly salary of