Back
2011 MarsdenLR 2811
GABRIEL GUMIS
LEE LEONG SAM & ORS – Appellant
Versus
SARAWAK SHELL BHD – Respondent
The court upheld the importance of compliance with appellate court decisions in employment disputes concerning retrenchment, impacting claims for reinstatement and compensation.
Headnote:(A) Industrial Relations Act - Fair Labour Practice - Retrenchment benefits - Claimants retrenched by the Company commenced proceedings claiming reinstatement and compensation due to alleged unfair retrenchment. Court previously allowed claims for back wages but denied reinstatement compensation. Subsequent High Court and Court of Appeal decisions impacted claim analysis. (Paras 1-3)
(B) Abandonment of claims - Two Claimants withdrew their claims post Court of Appeal decision; claims struck off. (Paras 2, 3)
Facts of the case:
61 Claimants challenged their retrenchment by the Company during a reorganization, asserting unfair practices and seeking reinstatement or compensation. The Company paid retrenchment benefits. Legal proceedings resulted in different rulings, influencing subsequent actions.
Findings of Court:
The Court acknowledged the abandonment of 2 Claimants’ claims and ordered them struck off in light of the appellate court's decision, maintaining the procedural integrity of the ongoing claims.
Issues: The main issues involved the validity of the retrenchment, the appropriate remedies for the Claimants, and the impact of appellate decisions on individual claims.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed the importance of established precedents and the legal outcomes of preceding rulings, emphasizing the need to comply with relevant appellate decisions in ongoing matters.
Result: Claims of the two Claimants struck off.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. retrenchment claims and compensation disputes (Para 1 , 2) |
Background of cases
A total of 61 Claimants are involved in these series of 6 cases which were brought up against the Company. The 6 cases are 8/4-234/97, 8/4-406/97, 8/4-653/97, 8/4-8/98, 8/4-166/98 and 8/4-334/98. The Claimants had been retrenched by the Company following a reorganisation exercise in 1996. The Claimants had contended that the retrenchment was wrong and amounted to unfair labour practice. They therefore sought reinstatement into their former employment or compensation in lieu of reinstatement.
The Company had paid retrenchment benefits to all the Claimants.
A "test case" in Case No. 8/4-234/97 Peter Lenjau Lalo & Ibrahim Bin Salleh v. Sarawak Shell Bhd. was tried before the then Chairman Mr. Lim Heng Seng. As to the reasons why these 2 particular Claimants were selected to be in the "test case", they appear now to be lost in the sands of time. When Mr. Lim Heng Seng left the Industrial Court, the Award of the Court was left to be written by YA Tuan Yussof Ahmad in Kuala Lumpur. He handed down Award No. 303/2004 on 27th March, 2004. In brief, the Award disallowed the Claimants claims for reinstatement, but allowed their claims for 24 months backwages. The Award also did not give the usual compensation in lieu of reinstatement to the Claimants. The Award reasoned that the Court would have used the usual formula of awarding 1 month salary for every completed year of service. Based on this formula, the Chairman felt that what the Company had already given the Claimants in retrenchment benefits had actually exceeded the amount which the Chairman, using the formula, would have awarded to the Claimants. Hence, the Chairman did not award any compensation in lieu of reinstatement.
The Claimants took the decision to the High Court in Kuala Lumpur for judicial review in R1-25-89-04 . Pending the review, the parties agreed that the proceedings in the Industrial Court should be stayed. On 22nd April, 2009 the High Court in Kuala Lumpur handed down its decision, which, in brief, favoured the Claimants.
On 15th May, 2009 the Company appealed against the decision of the High Court to the Court of Appeal. On 14th June, 2011 the Court of Appeal in a decision given orally, allowed the appeal and set aside the decision of the High Court.
Subsequent to the decision of the Court of Appeal, this case was called up by this Court for case management on 1st August, 2011.
Abandonment of claims by 2 Claimants in Case 8/4-166/98
At the case management held on 1st August, 2011, the learned Mr. Bong Ah Loi, counsel for the Claimants informed the Court that 2 of the 5 Claimants in this case would now be abandoning their claims in view of the decision of the Court of Appeal which was handed down on 14th June, 2011. Counsel requested that the claims of these 2 Claimants be struck off. The said 2 Claimants are:-
(1) Garry Gar Gaok
(2) Ting Sii Chiong
