2026 MarsdenLR 1092

INDUSTRIAL COURT MALAYSIA
PRAVIN KAUR JESSY, CHAIRMAN
Mohd Ridzuan Bin Yahya – Appellant
Versus
Jia Da Engineering Construction Sdn. Bhd. – Respondent
20/4-970/26

Employer bears burden to prove dismissal with just cause or excuse on balance of probabilities; mere allegations insufficient. For probationer, backwages limited to 12 months' salary per Second Schedule of Industrial Relations Act 1967.

Headnote:(A) Industrial Relations Act, 1967 - Sections 20, 29(d), 30(5) and Second Schedule paragraph 2 - Unfair dismissal - Probationer - Ex parte hearing - Burden of proof on employer to show just cause or excuse - Standard of proof on balance of probabilities - Mere allegations in termination letter insufficient to discharge burden - Company’s failure to adduce evidence leads to finding of dismissal without just cause or excuse - Reinstatement not available for probationer - Backwages limited to unexpired probation period (maximum 12 months) - Withholding of salary and allowances prior to dismissal is distinct from backwages and must be paid - Interest at 8% per annum on unpaid award after 30 days. (Paras 16, 17, 18-20, 29-33)

(B) Ex parte hearings - Under Section 29(d) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1967, the Court may proceed to hear and determine a matter in the absence of a party who has been served with notice and fails to appear - Court must ensure proper service and notification before proceeding ex parte. (Paras 18-20)

Facts of the case:
The Claimant was employed as an Assistant Contract Manager on probation for six months from 17 September 2025, earning a basic salary of RM6,800 per month plus allowances. On 30 October 2025, he was summarily dismissed by the Company on grounds of insubordination and persistent poor performance. The Company did not appear or participate in the proceedings despite being served with notices. The matter proceeded ex parte. The Claimant sought reinstatement or compensation.

Findings of Court:
The Company failed to adduce any evidence to substantiate the allegations in the termination letter. No warning letters, performance appraisals or contemporaneous documents were produced. The burden of proof on the employer was not discharged. The dismissal was therefore without just cause or excuse and contrary to equity and good conscience. The Court awarded backwages for the unexpired balance of the probationary period (4.5 months) amounting to RM30,600, plus the withheld October 2025 salary and allowances of RM8,000, total RM38,600, with interest at 8% per annum if not paid within 30 days.

Issues: The main issues were: (i) what was the reason for termination; (ii) whether the reason was made out by the Company; and (iii) whether the termination was with or without just cause or excuse.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the employer bears the burden to prove on a balance of probabilities that dismissal was with just cause or excuse. Where the employer fails to adduce any evidence, the dismissal is without just cause or excuse. For a probationer, reinstatement is not appropriate; backwages are limited to the unexpired probation period up to a maximum of 12 months’ salary under the Second Schedule of the Industrial Relations Act 1967. Salary and allowances earned before dismissal are contractual entitlements separate from backwages.

Result: Claim allowed. The Company was ordered to pay the Claimant RM38,600 within 30 days, with interest at 8% per annum from the 31st day until full settlement.