Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA PULAU PINANG
ISUTA INTERNATIONAL SDN BHD & ORS – Appellant
Versus
MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA & ANOR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. arguments about the necessity of leave. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 3. court’s reasoning regarding the application of s 263 of coa. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47) |
| 4. criteria for adding necessary parties. (Para 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
[1] This was an application brought by 2nd and 3rd applicants pursuant to O 53 of the Rules of the High , 1980 (RHC) to quash the Interim Award No 1337 of 2011 issued on 13 September 2011 by the learned Chairman (Chairman) of the Industrial Court (IC) in Industrial Court Case No 18/4-153/11.
[2] The 2nd respondent had lodged a representation under s 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1967 (IR Act) that he had been dismissed on 9 October 2008 by Isuta International Sdn Bhd (the 1st applicant) without just cause and excuse. The Honourable Minister of Human Resources had on 25 October 2010 referred the representation to IC for an award under s 20(3) of the IR Act.
[3] On 17 June 2010 however, the 1st applicant had resolved to b
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
