The submission of false expense claims constitutes a fundamental breach of the implied duty of mutual trust and confidence in an employment relationship, justifying dismissal, as honesty and integrity are essential characteristics required of every employee regardless of their length of service.

Headnote:(A) Industrial Relations Act, 1967 - Section 20(3) - Dismissal - Misconduct - Submission of falsified accommodation receipts - Breach of the duty of mutual trust and confidence - Burden of proof rests on the employer to establish misconduct on a balance of probabilities; once established, the burden shifts back to the employee to challenge the findings.

(B) Evidence Act, 1950 - Sections 101 and 114(g) - Adverse inference - Failure of a party to produce material evidence within their possession or control when challenged allows the court to presume the evidence if produced would be unfavorable to that party.

(C) Employment Law - Integrity and fiduciary duties - Honesty is an essential requirement in an employment relationship, especially where financial claims are involved - Dishonesty and fraudulent claims constitute gross misconduct justifying dismissal, as they destroy the root of the employment relationship.

Facts of the case:
The claimant was dismissed by the employer for submitting falsified accommodation receipts for business trips. The employer alleged the receipts were for non-existent hotels at the given addresses or used incorrect registration details and invoicing methods. Upon being asked to produce the original receipts for verification, the claimant failed to do so, leading the employer to hold a domestic inquiry where the claimant was found guilty of all charges. The claimant challenged the dismissal as being without just cause or excuse.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the employer had successfully proven the allegations of misconduct on a balance of probabilities. The court noted that the claimant failed to provide independent corroborative evidence to substantiate the validity of the disputed receipts. The claimant's inconsistent explanations regarding the receipts were found to lack credibility, and the court drew an adverse inference against the claimant for failing to produce primary evidence.

Issues: The main issues were whether the claimant committed the acts of misconduct as alleged by the employer and whether those acts warranted summary dismissal.

Ratio Decidendi: The submission of falsified claims for reimbursement represents a grave act of dishonesty that fundamentally breaches the relationship of trust and confidence between an employer and employee. Such misconduct is considered a serious infringement of the employment contract, making continued employment untenable regardless of the claimant's length of service or the amount of money involved.

Result: The claimant's claim for unfair dismissal was dismissed; the termination of employment was declared just and lawful.

REFERENCE:

This is a reference dated 24.10.2023 made by the Director General of Industrial Relations pursuant to subsection 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 [Act 177] arising out of the dismissal of Nordin bin Wahab (“the Claimant”) by Antah Schindler Sdn. Bhd. (“the Company”) on 10.05.2023.

AWARD

BRIEF FACTS

Vide a Letter of Offer of Employment dated 12.01.1994 (pg 1-2 of COB-1) the Claimant was employed by the Company as a Basic Grade Technician with effect from 17.01.1994. The Claimant was confirmed in employment with effect from 1 July 1994, vide a memorandum dated 22 June 1994 (pg 3 of COB-1). The Claimant's last held position at the time of his dismissal was Technician (A).

Sometime in or about October 2022, it came to the attention of the Company that the Claimant submitted falsified accommodation receipts for business trips in September 2022 (hereinafter collectively referred to as "the Said Accommodation Receipts")(pg 4-6 of COB1), details of which are summarized below:

Date	Location	Hotel Name & Address	Receipt No	Amount Claimed
01.09.2022 - 09.09.2022	Malacca	118 Hotel Metro No. 15G, Jalan PM5, Plaza Mahkota, Melaka Raya 75000, Melaka	M-A- 2022-80096	1,260.00
09.09.2022 - 20.09.2022	Johor Bharu	Hotel Time No. 15-17, Jalan Permas 10/8, Bandar Baru Permas Jaya, 81750 Johor Bharu, Johor.	Not Stated	1,518.00
20.09.2022 - 27.09.2022	Malacca	118 Hotel Metro No. 15G, Jalan PM5, Plaza Mahkota, Melaka Raya 75000, Melaka	M-A- 2022-100278	1,115.00

Upon review of the investigation findings, the Company issued a show cause letter dated 14.12.2022 (pages 7-8 of COB-1), which instructed the Claimant to provide his written explanation to the following charges of misconduct:

Allegation 1

That you had submitted a falsified accommodation receipt Hotel Metro, Bandar Hilir Malacca, invoice No: M-A-2022-80096; Room No: 108 of RM1,260.00 for the business trip, CPSI 5 years inspection from 01 September 2022 until 09 September 2022 to Melaka, through expenses claim report dated 9/11/2022 on Concur System.

Allegation 2

That you had submitted a falsified accommodation receipt Hotel Time, Pernas Jaya Invoice No. not available; Room No:206 of RM1,518.00 for the business trip, CPSI 5 years inspection from 09 September 2022 until 20 September 2022 to Johor Bahru through expenses claim report dated 09/11/2022 on Concur System.

Allegation 3

That you had submitted a falsified accommodation receipt Hotel Metro, Bandar Hilir Malacca Invoice No: M-A-2022-100278; Room 106 of RM1,115.00 for the business trip, CPSI 5 years inspection from 20 September 2022 until 27 September 2022 to Melaka through expenses claim report dated 09/11/2022 on Concur System. It was discovered that your colleague Murali Letchumanan (Emp No: 542554) was assigned as a working partner for this business trips. The bookings and deposit payment for accommodate stated above were done physically by yourself at the hotel counter where the initial deposit payments made by you for Murali and yourself.

Allegation 4

That you had failed to submit the original receipts of hotel claims above despite was officially requested to do so by 2 December 2022.

The Company by a notice of Domestic Inquiry dated 30.03.2023, (pg16-17 of COB-1). the Claimant was informed that he was required to attend a domestic inquiry on 10.04.2023, to answer to all four (4) charges of misconduct listed therein. The domestic inquiry proceeded as scheduled on 10.04.2023 and was completed on the same day. The panel of inquiry deliberated on the matter and found the Claimant guilty of all four (4) charges of misconduct (pg 52-53 of COB-2).

Vide a letter of dismissal dated 09.10.2023 (pg18-20 of COB-1), the Claimant's employment with the Company was terminated with effect from 10.05.2023.

The Court has gone through the evidence as given through testimony in Court and the documents and submission that have been filed. Those documents and submissions are listed for ease of reference as follows:

(i) Statement of Case dated 19.12.2023;

(ii) Statement in Rep

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 MarsdenLR 5

The submission of false expense claims constitutes a fundamental breach of the implied duty of mutual trust and confidence in an employment relationship, justifying dismissal, as honesty and integrity are essential characteristics required of every employee regardless of their length of service.

Login now and unlock premium legal research