SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 MarsdenLR 1397

INDUSTRIAL COURT KUALA LUMPUR
POONMOLI MAHENDRAN – Appellant
Versus
RHB BANK BERHAD – Respondent
Award No: 1054 Of 2024 [Case No: 14(6)(15)/4-739/19]



Petitioner Advocates:Ramesh N P Chandran,Tejal Harash ,Respondent Advocate: Thavaselvi Pararajasingam

The dismissal of an employee for forgery constitutes serious misconduct, justifying termination under the Industrial Relations Act 1967, even in the absence of a domestic inquiry.

Headnote:(A) Industrial Relations Act 1967 – Section 20(3) – Dismissal of employee – Claimant dismissed for alleged forgery of signatures on insurance policies – Court found that the Bank had proven on a balance of probabilities that the Claimant forged signatures, constituting serious misconduct – The absence of a domestic inquiry was deemed an irregularity, not fatal to the dismissal – Dismissal upheld as fair and with just cause. (Paras 50, 100, 112)

(B) Burden of proof – In dismissal cases, the employer bears the burden to prove just cause for dismissal – The standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities. (Paras 52, 56)

(C) Misconduct – Serious misconduct includes acts of dishonesty that undermine trust and integrity in the workplace – The Claimant's actions were found to be incompatible with her duties as a Sales Manager. (Paras 100, 108)

Facts of the case: The Claimant was dismissed from her position as Sales Manager at RHB Bank Berhad for allegedly forging customer signatures on insurance policies. The Bank conducted an investigation and found sufficient evidence of misconduct. (Paras 5, 24)

Findings of Court: The Court found that the Claimant's actions constituted serious misconduct and that the Bank had reasonable grounds for dismissal based on the evidence presented. (Paras 112)

Issues: Whether the dismissal was with just cause and whether the absence of a domestic inquiry was fatal to the dismissal. (Paras 50, 93)

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the Bank had proven the Claimant's misconduct on a balance of probabilities and that the absence of a domestic inquiry did not invalidate the dismissal. (Paras 112)

Result: Claim dismissed.

AWARD

Eswary Maree:

Reference

[1] This is a reference under s 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (the Act) by the Honourable Minister of Human Resources, emanates from the dismissal of Poonmoli a/p Mahendran ("the Claimant") by RHB Bank Berhad ("the Bank") on 3 December 2018.

Preamble

[2] This case was partly heard before the then Learned President Yang Arif Puan Reihana binti Abd Razak and the hearing was continued before me as directed by the said Learned President. With this regard, s 23(6) of the Act reads as follow:

"During the absence or inability to act from illness or any other cause by the Chairman, the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong may appoint another person to exercise the powers or perform the functions of the Chairman and, notwithstanding that the Chairman may have resumed the duties of his office, the person so appointed may continue to exercise the powers or perform the functions for the purpose of completing the hearing and determining any trade dispute or matter commenced before him."

[3] Thus, it is clear that s 23(6) of the Act allows another Chairman to continue hearing and determine a part heard case. Reference is also made to the High Court decision in Bax Global (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd v. Sukhder Singh Pritam Singh & Anor, 2010 MarsdenLR 686 wherein it was held that a Learned Chairman has the jurisdiction to hand down an Award in a matter heard by another Chairman.

[4] This Court will determine the issues before it and make its findings based on the pleadings, notes of proceedings, the relevant oral and documentary evidences, the cause papers and submissions. The following documents were filed before this Court:

(i) Statement of Case dated 17 July 2019;

(ii) Statement in Reply dated 10 September 2019;

(iii) Rejoinder dated 1 November 2019;

(iv) The Bank's Bundle of Documents marked as COB-1, COB-2, COB-3, COB- 4 and COB-5 respectively;

(v) The Claimant's Bundle of Documents marked as CLB-1 and CLB-2, respectively;

(vi) Item 3 of ID (except for Item 3, all other items referred to in the Index of ID, which was filed after the close of the Bank's case was objected to by the Bank on 12 December 2022);

(vii) Witness Statements of the Bank's Witnesses which was marked as follows:

COWS-1: Thanaletchumy A/P Semaselaun;

COWS-2: Nurun Najihah Binti Zainal Abidin (Subpoenaed Witness); COWS-3: Norliana Binti Abdul Aziz (Subpoenaed Witness);

COWS-4: Lau Chin Hock;

COWS-5: Chandran Selvarajah;

COWS-6: Lim Yok Chaw;

COWS-7: Arumi Binti Kiswantoh;

COWS-8: Mohd Fadzil Bin Ahmad;

COWS-9(a) and COWS-9(b): Chong Sam Yee (Subpoenaed Witness);

COWS-10(a) and COWS-10(b): Chan Wai Leng (Subpoenaed Witness);

(viii) Witness Statement of the Claimant's witnesses which was marked as follows:

CLWS-1: Poonmoli A/P Mahendran (the Claimant)

CLWS-2: Shajidah Binti Maiden

(ix) The Claimant's Written Submissions dated 1 September 2023;

(x) The Bank's Written Submission dated 1 September 2023;

(xi) The Claimant's Written Submissions In Reply dated 6 October 2023; and

(xii) The Bank's Written Submissions In Reply dated 2 October 2023.

Brief Facts

[5] The Claimant commenced employment with the Bank on permanent basis on 1 April 2014 as an Executive (Personal Grade: R1) and she was confirmed in her position on 1 October 2014. With effect from 1 January 2016, the Claimant was promoted to the position of Sales Manager - Bancassurance. The Claimant was suspended from service with effect from 30 August 2018. Thereafter, a Notice of Intended Disciplinary Action (NOIDA) dated 22 October 2018 was issued to the Claimant. By a letter dated 25 October 2018, the Claimant provided her explanation to NOIDA. Finally, the Bank dismissed the Claimant with effect from 3 December 2018.

The Bank's Case

[6] By a letter of Offer of Employment on Contract Basis dated 1 April 2013, the Claimant was offered employment with the Bank as Financial Executive on contract basis posted at the Kampung Baru Sungai Buloh Branch (KBSB Branch) with effect from 3 April 2013, subject to the terms and conditions speci


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top