Back
2025 MarsdenLR 2897
INDUSTRIAL COURT KUALA LUMPUR
LOW KOK LEONG – Appellant
Versus
A V-ECOPALMS SDN BHD – Respondent
Award No: 169 of 2025 [Case No: 14/4-788/23]
The Company was found liable for wrongful dismissal due to failure to justify termination without cause, affirming that employment relationships can be established through evidence despite contractual ambiguities.
Headnote:(A) Industrial Relations Act 1967 - Section 20 - Dismissal of employee without just cause - Claimant employed by A V-Ecopalms Sdn Bhd challenged his termination on grounds of wrongful dismissal without prior warning or just cause - Court ruled that the Company is the proper employer despite discrepancies in employment contracts - Termination found to lack valid justification; court mandates compensation in form of back wages for unexpired contract term - Total compensation awarded: RM108,416. (Paras 1, 56, 61, 68, 71)
(B) Employment relationship - Court establishes Company as employer based on evidence of salary payments, management control, and contractual obligations despite claims of representation by a subsidiary. (Paras 27, 40, 48)
(C) Burden of proof - The Company failed to demonstrate just cause for dismissal, thus found in violation of statutory employment protection. (Paras 57, 60)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. judicial reference under industrial relations act (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. claimant's employment details and termination (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. company's defense on employer status (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. court's observations on employer identity (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 5. evidence evaluation of employment relationship (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 6. management practices and legal implications (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44) |
| 7. statutory contribution implications (Para 45 , 46 , 47 , 48) |
| 8. legal standards for dismissal (Para 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
| 9. conclusion on dismissal grounds (Para 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60) |
| 10. compensation and backwages determination (Para 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65) |
| 11. final order and payout calculations (Para 66 , 67 , 68 , 69) |
| 12. award for wrongful termination (Para 70) |
Reference
[1] This is a reference under s 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (the Act) by the Director General of Industrial Relations, emanating from the dismissal of Low Kok Leong ("the Claimant") by A V-Ecopalms Sdn Bhd ("the Company") on 15 July 2022.
Preamble
[2] This Court had considered the notes of proceedings and the following pleadings, evidence, documents and submissions in handing down this Award:
(i) Statement of Case dated 18 May 2023;
(ii) Statement In Reply dated 30 May 2023;
(iii) Rejoinder dated 7 June 2023;
(iv) Company's Bundle of Documents: COB-1;
(v) Company's Supplementary Bundle of Documents: COB-2;
(vi) Claimant's Bundle of Documents: CLB-1;
(vii) Claimant's Additional Bundle of Documents: CLB-2;
(viii) Claimant's Additional Bundle of Documents (2): CLB-3;
(ix) Witness Statement of Tan Hock Yew: COWS-1;
(x) Witness Statement of the Claimant, Low Kok Leong: CLWS-1;
(xi) The Company's Written Submission dated 7 October 2024;
(xii) The Claimant's Written Submission dated 7 October 2024;
(xiii) The Company's Written Submission In Reply dated 30 October 2024; and
(xiv) The Claimant's Written Submission In Reply dated 31 October 2024.
The Claimant's Case
[3] On 6 January 2019, the Claimant was employed by the Company as a Senior Mill Finance Administrator at Manuhing Palm Oil Mill, Kalimantan Tengah, Indonesia from 6 January 2019 to 5 January 2021 with a monthly salary of RM16,000.00.
[4] On 9 January 2021, the Company renewed the Employment Contract with the Claimant on the following terms:
(a) The term of employment is renewed for another two (2) years from 7 January 2021 to 6 January 2023; and
(b) The salary of the Claimant would be RM17,600.00
[5] On 13 May 2022, the Claimant was promoted as the General Manager by the Company.
[6] On 15 July 2022, without any prior written notice or otherwise, the Company informed the Claimant that his employment was terminated from July 2022 onwards.
[7] At all material times, the Company had failed, refused and/or neglected to give any valid reasons, cause or excuse to the Claimant with respect to the termination.
[8] The Claimant averred that the Company had wrongfully terminated the Claimant's employment in which the particulars are as follows:
(a) The Company had failed to give any prior warning to the Claimant before the termination;
(b) The Company had failed to issue any letter to show cause against the Claimant before the termination;
(c) The Company had failed to carry out any domestic inquiry;
(d) The Company had failed to give any just cause or excuse to the Claimant with regard to the termination; and
(e) The Company had not terminated the Claimant's employment in accordance with the employment contract particularly cls 41 and 42.
[9] The Claimant has been terminated without just cause and excuse.
The Company's Case
[10] The Claimant has wrongfully filed this claim against the Company as the Company was never at any material time the employer of the Claimant.
[11] The fact is that at all material times, the Claimant's employer was PT Berkala Maju Bersama (PT Berkala Maju) which
