COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
OMAR OTHMAN – Appellant
Versus
KULIM ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES SDN BHD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. high court erred in quashing industrial court's findings (Para 1 , 2 , 6) |
| 2. termination principles must be anchored in just cause (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. contractual terms on termination uphold must align with legal principles (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. technical defenses should not overshadow core legal merits (Para 10 , 11) |
[1] The appellant (employee) appeals against the decision of the High Court which had quashed the decision of the Industrial Court.
[2] The central argument before the High Court as well as the Industrial Court was related to the jurisprudence of 'termination simpliciter'. The Memorandum of Appeal reads as follows:
"1. The learned Judicial Commissioner erred in law and/or in fact in finding that the Industrial Court had acted irrationally and/or unreasonably in a Wednesbury sense and/or illegally and/or with procedural impropriety in arriving at its decision.
2. The learned Judicial Commissioner erred in law and/or in fact when His Lordship disturbed and/or interfered with the Industrial Court's findings of law and/or fact which found that the respondent had unlawfully terminated the appellant's employment.
3. The learned Judicial Commissioner erred in law an
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.