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

1985 MarsdenLR 62

INDUSTRIAL COURT KUALA LUMPUR
STAMFORD EXECUTIVE CENTRE – Appellant
Versus
DHARSINI GANESAN – Respondent


AWARD

Chairman: Dato' Wong Chin Wee:

[1] The basic issue of the case before the Court is whether the dismissal of the Claimant by the Company on 23rd April 1985 was with just cause or excuse; and if not, what should be the remedy.

[2] The Claimant joined the services of the Company on 15th August 1983 as a lecturer on a monthly salary of $900.00. At the time of her dismissal she was drawing a salary of $1,000.00 per month.

The brief preliminary outline of the case for the Company is that when the Claimant applied for employment with the Company she stated in her Application for Employment form (Exhibit Co.1) that she had passed Parts III & IV of the examinations held by the Institute of Chartered Secretaries & Administrators (hereinafter referred to as ICSA) and when this was found to be false, she was dismissed. The Company further averred that no domestic inquiry was necessary and none was held, because the Claimant had signed an undertaking in Part D of the Application for Employment form which reads:

"I understand that if I accept an offer of employment and any of the above information is subsequently found to be incorrect, my employment may be terminated forthwith."

As a further gro

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top