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

2012 MarsdenLR 1326

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
DYNACRAFT INDUSTRIES SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
KAMARUDDIN KANA MOHD SHARIF & ORS – Respondent


Table of Content
1. introduction to the appeal. (Para 1)
2. background of retrenchment and employment offers. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. industrial court's findings on retrenchment. (Para 9)
4. court's previous findings and upheld rulings. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
5. interpretation of the lifo principle. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 19 , 21)
6. arguments regarding the application of lifo principle. (Para 16)
7. challenges to the application of lifo principle. (Para 18 , 20 , 22 , 23)

[1] This is an appeal by the appellant against the decision of the Court of Appeal which dismissed the appellant's appeal against the decision of the High Court dismissing the appellant's application for an order of certiorari to quash the Industrial Court award dated 26 August 2004 ("the 2004 award"). The 2004 award was made by the Industrial Court pursuant to a reference made under s 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 ("IRA") arising out of the dismissals of Kamaruddin Kana Mohd Sharif & Ors ("the respondents") by the appellant.

Background Facts

[2] The appellant was engaged in the manufacture of semiconductor lead frames which were components used in the manufacture of semiconductor integrated circuits. I

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top