SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 MarsdenLR 1156

INDUSTRIAL COURT MALAYSIA
Poon Beng Lam – Appellant
Versus
SYW Industry Sdn. Bhd. – Respondent
10/4-1111/22



IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA AT IPOH, PERAK CASE NO. 10/4-1111/22 BETWEEN POON BENG LAM …The Claimant AND SYW INDUSTRY SDN. BHD. …The Company AWARD NO.: 1532 OF 2023 Before: Y.A TUAN ZULHELMY BIN HASAN – CHAIRMAN Venue: Industrial Court of Malaysia at Ipoh, Perak Date of Reference: 13/07/2022 Dates of Mention: 16/08/2022, 02/11/2022 & 03/03/2023 Date of Hearing: 20/03/2023 & 21/03/2023 Representation: For the Claimant:

Andrew Soong Tze Toong Messrs. BH Koh, Soong, Zarin & Partners For the Company:

Ammira Marlini Binti Abu Samah Malaysian Employers Federation [MEF]

Reference:

This is a reference made by the Director General of Industrial Relations Malaysia dated 13/07/2022 pursuant to Section 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 which was received by the Industrial Court of Malaysia on 15/07/2022 arising out of the alleged dismissal of Poon Beng Lam (hereinafter referred to as “the Claimant” by SYW Industry Sdn. Bhd. (hereinafter referred to as “the Company”) on

01/12/2021.

AWARD Factual Backgrounds:

1. The dispute referred by the Director General of Industrial Relations Malaysia to this division of the Industrial Court under Section 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 arising out from the alleged constructive dismissal of the Claimant by the Company on 01/12/2021.

2. On 23/02/2018 vide a Latter of Appointment (at pages 1-4 of COB-1), the Company had offered the Claimant the position in the Company as Mould Engineer cum Mould Designer and the Claimant accepted the offer on 26/02/2018 as the same date the Claimant had commenced work with the Company. Thereafter, the Claimant was confirmed employment with the Company vide a Letter of Confirmation dated 26/05/2018 even though the probation period was for six (6) months.

3. On or about 08/07/2020, the Claimant was invited by Siew Kam Hau, the Manager of the Company and also the son of the Director of the Company; Siew Yuen Wai, to establish a company known as Stepro Mix Sdn. Bhd. Thereafter the Claimant had embarked onto the business with Siew Kam Hau until a dispute had culminated into a show down on 29/11/2021 whereby Siew Kam Hau had asked the Claimant to tender in his resignation as the Director of Stepro Mix Sdn. Bhd. and also to sell his shares back to Siew Kam Hau at a paltry sum due to the alleged of non-disclosure of accounts by Siew Kam Hau in respect of the transaction of the Stepro Mix Sdn. Bhd.

4. The Claimant’s last salary before his dismissal is RM4,250.00 per month and his attendance allowance is RM400.00 per month for a total sum of RM4,650.00 per month.

5. The Claimant’s claim of constructive dismissal was mounted on his averment that he was unable to record his thumbprint to register his attendance on 01/12/2021, 02/12/2021, 03/12/2021 and subsequently on 09/12/2021. As such, the Claimant alleged that he had been denied entry to the Company’s premise to perform his work. In his attempt to justify his claim, the Claimant alleged that the fingerprint incident was orchestrated by the Company to victimized him and dismissed him for non-attendance since he refused to sign and tender his resignation from his position at Stepro Mix Sdn. Bhd. upon which he also alleged that he was forced to resign from the Company.

6. The Claimant now files an unfair dismissal by way of constructive dismissal claim from his service against the Company before this Court without just cause or excuse, which is denied by the Company that the Claimant had left his employment with the Company on his volition.

The Claimant’s Case

7. The Claimant pleads that the Company had tried to create a situation to show that the Claimant had walked out his employment by not turning up to work and for all intents and purposes claimed that the Claimant had breached the employment contract.

8. The Company had given him undue pressure to resign as Director of Stepro Mix Sdn. Bhd. and to transfer his shares for a measly consideration sum and due to his refusal to do so, the Company had embarked on unscrupu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top