Paramalingam J Doraisamy:

Reference

[1] This is a reference made under s 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (Act 177), arising out of the dismissal of Mohd Farid Bin Abu Hassan (hereinafter referred to as "the Claimant") by NV5 Malaysia Sdn Bhd (hereinafter referred to as "the Company") on 7 March 2023.

[2] The Reference by the Director General of Industrial Relations ("DGIR") in this case required the court to hear and determine the claimant's complaint of dismissal by the company on 7 March 2023.

I. Procedural History

[3] The court received the letter pertaining to the DGIR's reference under s 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 on 14 December 2023.

[4] The matter was fixed for mention on 16 January 2024 and 22 November 2024.

[5] The case was heard together with Case No 22/4-121/24 (Abdurrahman Tukimin v. NV5 Malaysia Sdn Bhd).

[6] The trial proceeded for both matters concurrently on 11 August 2025, 12 August 2025 and concluded on 15 August 2025.

II. The Parties' Position On The Merits

(a) The Claimant

[7] The Claimant was appointed as a BIM Modeler by the company vide Employment Contract dated 31 March 2022. He commenced employment on 9 May 2022 with a basic salary of RM7,000.00 per month and was confirmed in his position on 7 August 2022.

[8] During the tenure of his employment with the company, the claimant reported to Ms Calisa Wong Sze Yeng (COW-2; Associate Director). There was no provision under the Employment Contract which stated that he was exclusively employed to support or serve under the Mediatech Design Group ("MDG") or to report to MDG.

[9] During a meeting held on 7 March 2023, the claimant was informed by the company that a restructuring done by MDG had resulted in the Mediatech Team in Kuala Lumpur becoming redundant. The Mediatech Team consisted of one BIM Manager (i.e. En Muhammad Raimi Hanif Bin Ruslan (CLW-3) and three BIM Modelers (i.e. En Abdurrahman Bin Tukimin (CLW-2), Muhammad Syah Bin Kaulan ("Syah Kaulan") and the Claimant).

[10] On 7 March 2023, the company had issued a letter of termination of employment effective immediately to the claimant and the BIM Manager, (i.e. CLW-3. As for the other BIM Modeler, i.e. CLW-2, the company stated that he will be informed of his last day of employment thereafter whilst he was completing the final tasks pertaining to the MDG Project. However, another BIM Modeler, (i.e. Syah Kaulan, was exempted from the retrenchment exercise by the company and continues to be in the employment of the company to date.

[11] The Claimant was terminated from his employment immediately on 7 March 2023 in accordance with cl 6(b) of the Employment Contract which provides as follows:

"After the probationary period, two (2) months' notice or payment of the equivalent basic salary in lieu of notice is required by either party to terminate the employment contract for rescission with cause".

[12] The Company had paid 2 months' salary to the Claimant in lieu of the 2 months' notice period.

[13] The Claimant contends that the company's action in terminating his employment without any other reason tantamount to a 'termination simpliciter' and thus was done without just cause or excuse. The ground of redundancy was only raised by the claimant subsequently in the company's pleading, i.e. the Statement In Reply. In any event, the ground of redundancy is not genuine and could not be proven by the company.

[14] The Claimant also contends that his termination from employment was not done in accordance with the norms and procedure under the Code of Conduct for Industrial Harmony.

(b) The Company

[15] On 20 February 2022, the company was informed by MDG that MDG required, through the company, the services of a Mediatech-specific production team (which would comprise a BIM Manager and a team of BIM Modelers) in Kuala Lumpur ("Mediatech Team") to exclusively support and service MDG, and that the role entailed specific and specialised job functions tailored to MDG's operational needs.

[16] Vide email d