Back
FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
AHMAD ZAHRI MIRZA ABDUL HAMID – Appellant
Versus
AIMS CYBERJAYA SDN BHD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of employment disputed: fixed-term vs permanent. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. principles for lifting veil established in prior cases. (Para 8 , 9 , 19 , 22) |
| 3. lifting corporate veil appropriate in employment law for justice. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 4. lifting the corporate veil requires substantial evidence of underlying fraud or inequity. (Para 24 , 85) |
| 5. work permit status irrelevant in determining permanent employment. (Para 40 , 41 , 57 , 58) |
| 6. continuity of employment must be recognized irrespective of contract labels. (Para 44) |
| 7. implications of work permit on employment status. (Para 68) |
[1] The key issue in this appeal is whether the appellant/claimant was employed on a fixed-term contract or was a permanent employee of the respondent at the material time. The Industrial Court and the High Court found that the appellant/claimant was a permanent employee of the respondent and his dismissal from his employment was without just cause or excuse. On appeal, the Court of Appeal set aside the decision of the High Court and allowed the respondents appeal.
[2] On 7 January 2019, this Court granted the appellant/claimant leave to appeal on the following question
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
