Back
INDUSTRIAL COURT KUALA LUMPUR
SUNIL KUMAR PARAYIL KANNOTH – Appellant
Versus
TARPON ENERGY SERVICES ASIA PACIFIC SDN BHD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural history of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. claimant's employment history and dismissal. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. company's position on retrenchment. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. role of industrial court. (Para 24 , 25) |
| 5. dispute over claimant's employment start date. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 6. burden of proof on redundancy. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 7. no obligation to consult employees. (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46) |
| 8. replacement and retrenchment principles. (Para 47 , 48 , 49) |
| 9. reasonableness of the company's restructuring. (Para 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
| 10. conclusion and dismissal of the case. (Para 56) |
Reference
[1] This is a reference made under s 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (Act 177), arising out of the dismissal of Sunil Kumar Parayil Kannoth (hereinafter referred to as "the Claimant") by Tarpon Energy Services Asia Pacific Sdn Bhd (hereinafter referred to as "the Company") on 7 April 2020.
[2] The Ministerial reference in this case required the Court to hear and determine the Claimant's complaint of dismissal by the Co
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
