LABOUR LAW:Industrial court - Award - Backwages - Principles in assessing - Remuneration received from other employment after dismissal - Whether must be deducted from or set off against backwages to be awarded

The appellant was dismissed from the employ of the respondent company on 1 June 1986. The Industrial Court found for the appellant and awarded him arrears of salary (backwages) from 1 June 1986 to 11 October 1995 (last day of hearing), compensation in lieuof reinstatement of one month's salary for each year of service from 1 November 1984 (date joined) to 11 October 1995, and 20 days' wages in lieuof unutilised leave. The High Court refused the respondent's application for certioraribut the Court of Appeal allowed the respondent's appeal in part in respect of backwages. In quashing the award on backwages and remitting the matter to the Industrial Court for reassessment, the Court of Appeal held that in assessing the award for backwages the Industrial Court should have taken into account the fact that the appellant had found employment elsewhere after his dismissal. The appellant appealed to the Federal Court.

Held:

Per Steve Shim CJ (Sabah & Sarawak)

[1]Although the assessment of backwages is a matter well within the discretion of the Industrial Court, that discretion is not one which is unfettered; it has to be exercised according to law and to equity as conceived by s. 30(5) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967. The discretion is in the nature of a decision-making process and is therefore open to judicial review. In line with equity and good conscience the Industrial Court should, in assessing the quantum of backwages, take into account the fact, if established by evidence or admitted, that the workman has been gainfully employed elsewhere after his dismissal. A failure to do so amounts to a jurisdictional error of law and certiorariwill lie to correct it. In the present case, the Industrial Court had failed to take into account the material fact that the appellant had been gainfully employed soon after his dismissal. The award in respect of backwages was therefore flawed.

[Appeal dismissed; order of Court of Appeal quashing backwages and remitting matter to Industrial Court for reassessment affirmed.]

[Bahasa MalaysiaTranslation Of Headnotes]

Perayu telah dipecat daripada bekerja dengan syarikat responden pada 1 Jun 1986. Mahkamah Perusahaan membuat keputusan yang memihak kepada perayu dan telah memberikan award tunggakan gaji (gaji kebelakang) dari 1 Jun 1986 hingga 11 Oktober 1995 (tarikh terakhir perbicaraan) kepada beliau, pampasan bagi menggantikan penempatan semula gaji satu bulan bagi setiap tahun perkhidmatan daripada 1 November 1984 (tarikh mula bekerja) hingga 11 Oktober 1995, dan gaji 20 hari bagi menggantikan cuti yang tidak digunakan. Mahkamah Tinggi telah menolak permohonan responden untuk certioraritetapi Mahkamah Rayuan membenarkan rayuan responden sebahagiannya berhubung dengan gaji kebelakang. Dalam membatalkan award berhubung dengan gaji kebelakang dan mengemukakan semula perkara tersebut kepada Mahkamah Perusahaan untuk taksiran semula, Mahkamah Rayuan memutuskan bahawa dalam menaksirkan award gaji kebelakang Mahkamah Perusahaan seharusnya mengambilkira hakikat bahawa perayu telah mendapatkan pekerjaan di tempat lain selepas pemecatannya. Perayu merayu kepada Mahkamah Persekutuan.

Diputuskan:

Oleh Steve Shim HB (Sabah & Sarawak)

[1]Walaupun taksiran gaji kebelakang adalah merupakan perkara yang di dalam lingkungan budibicara Mahkamah Perusahaan, budibicara itu bukannya suatu budibicara yang tanpa batasan; ianya haruslah dilaksanakan menurut undang-undang dan ekuiti sepertimana yang ditafsirkan oleh s. 30(5) Akta Perhubungan Perindustrian 1967. Budibicara tersebut adalah menurut sifat proses membuat keputusan dan adalah dengan itu terbuka kepada kajian semula kehakiman. Sejajar dengan ekuiti dan perasaan baik Mahkamah Perusahaan seharusnya, dalam menaksirkan kuantum gaji kebelakang, mengambilkira