INDUSTRIAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
SUPPIAH VELLAISAMY – Appellant
Versus
THE NEW STRAITS TIMES PRESS (MALAYSIA) BERHAD – Respondent
AWARD
Franklin Goonting:
[1] This ministerial reference pursuant to s. 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 required the court to hear and determine the claimant's complaint of his dismissal by the respondent on 8 April 1997.
[2] The first thing the court will have to do is to ask itself whether there was a dismissal, and, secondly, if so, whether such dismissal was with or without just cause or excuse (see Wong Chee Hong v. Cathay Organisation (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd .
[3] The respondent denied dismissing the claimant. However, the claimant alleged that he had been constructively dismissed.
The Law
[4] The concept of constructive dismissal has been expounded many times over in our courts but nevertheless merits repeating here.
[5] In the landmark English case of Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v. Sharp [1978] IQB 761 2 WLR 244, Lord Denning MR explained the concept of constructive dismissal thus:
If the employer is guilty of conduct which is a significant breach going to the root of the contract of employment or which shows that the employer no longer intends to be bound by one or more of the essential terms of the contract, then the employee is entitled to treat himself as discharged from
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.