在2025年第1830号裁决中，工业法庭驳回了 Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perkilangan Perusahaan Makanan（工会）依据《1967年工业关系法》（Industrial Relations Act 1967, 简称 “IRA”）第56条，对 DCH Contract Manufacturing Sdn Bhd（公司）提出的不遵守申诉。 本案争议涉及公司被指未根据第4份集体协议（CA）第26条的规定，向六名工会会员支付2021年度花红。 工业法庭裁定，公司并未违反该集体协议，且其对绩效评级最低（即E级）的员工不发放花红，属依法行使其酌情权。 公司由本所资深律师 Muhamad Sharulnizam bin Mohd Roni 代理并胜诉。 该裁决就集体协议中花红条款的解释、雇主在绩效导向花红机制下酌情权的范围，以及《1967年工业关系法》第56条不遵守程序中的举证责任，提供了有益指引。 本案争议焦点 工会指称，公司违反了集体协议第26条。该条款规定如下： ...

Recently, the High Court set aside the Industrial Court award which had found that an employee's dismissal was without just cause or excuse and ordered his reinstatement (albeit to a demoted position) together with back wages. The High Court held that the employee's persistent refusal to comply with a lawful and valid transfer order amounted to wilful insubordination, constituting a fundamental breach of the employment relationship that justified summary dismissal. This rul

马来西亚上诉法院在 LEC v Kansai Paint Asia Pacific Sdn Bhd 一案中的最新裁决，再次提醒雇主，在纪律程序中，指控内容的准确界定绝非形式问题，而是直接影响举证责任及解雇是否能够成立的关键因素。 上诉法院在推翻高等法庭判决并恢复工业法庭裁决的同时，重申了工业法庭的职能并非建立于僵化的法律形式主义之上，而是植根于衡平 (equity)、良知与雇佣关系的现实考量。与此同时，法院亦强调，若雇主选择以盗窃性质来定性雇员的行为，则须承担证明不诚实意图的举证责任。 一名资深雇员与一时之失 本案涉及一名拥有近四十年服务年资的资深雇员。在公司从巴生港口科技大厦迁址期间，雇员被指示将所有物品留置原处，以便移交予业主。闭路电视录像其后显示，该雇员曾进入已腾空的处所，并带走两张椅子及两台投影机。经询问后，其承认未经事先批准擅自取走上述物品，并于其后不久将物品悉数归还。 然而，雇主仍启动纪律程序，并将该行为定性为盗窃或未经授权擅取公司财物。经内部纪律聆讯后，该雇员遭到解雇。 工业法庭：失当行为，然无不诚实 ...

Introduction The recent High Court decision in Mohd Sofian bin Amirudin v Bank Simpanan Nasional [2026] MLJU 1479 serves as an important reminder that an employer's contractual right to transfer employees is not unlimited. Even where an employment contract confers broad transfer powers, the exercise of those powers must remain consistent with the contract and cannot fundamentally alter the employee's position or responsibilities. Beyond clarifying the limits of transfer c

The recent decision of the Court of Appeal in LEC v Kansai Paint Asia Pacific Sdn Bhd (Appeal No. W-04(A)-423-09/2024) offers a pointed reminder of a principle often overlooked in workplace disputes: how an allegation is framed can determine the outcome as much as the facts themselves. In restoring the Industrial Court’s award, the appellate court reaffirmed that the Industrial Court’s role is anchored not in rigid legal formalism, but in equity, good conscience and the pra

In Award No. 1830 of 2025, the Industrial Court dismissed a non-compliance complaint brought by Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perkilangan Perusahaan Makanan (the Union) against DCH Contract Manufacturing Sdn Bhd (the Company) under Section 56 of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (IRA). The dispute concerned the Company’s alleged failure to pay a bonus for the year 2021 to six union members pursuant to Article 26 of the 4th Collective Agreement (CA). The Industrial Court held t

The Court of Appeal has drawn a firm jurisdictional line between the Labour Office and the Industrial Court, ruling that once an unfair dismissal claim is before the Industrial Court, the Labour Office is effectively stripped of authority to adjudicate related wage disputes. In Philip Phang Kin Ming & Anor v M Jets International Sdn Bhd (Civil Appeal No: B-04(A)-422-09/2024), the court unanimously held that Section 69A of the Employment Act 1955 (EA) operates as a statutor

In a recent decision (Award No. 1692 of 2025), the Industrial Court dismissed the unfair-dismissal claim brought by the Claimant, who is the Head of Aviation Security at the Pos Malaysia International Hub (PMIH), The court upheld Pos Malaysia Berhad’s (the Company) decision to terminate his employment. The Company was represented by the firm’s Senior Associate, Muhamad Sharunizam bin Mohd Roni. A Case Rooted In Governance Failures The dispute began with a whistleblower compla

In a landmark move, Malaysia has amended its Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code, effective July 2025, to criminalise all forms of bullying including cyberbullying. The legislative reform signals a new chapter in the country’s approach to interpersonal misconduct, extending legal scrutiny from schoolyards to boardrooms. The recent case that catalysed public interest in this topic was the tragic death of Zara Qairina Mahathir, a Form One student whose story gripped the na

Recently, our Senior Associate, Muhamad Sharulnizam Mohd Roni, successfully represented MBSB Bank Berhad in Syed A Faris Aljunid v MBSB Bank Berhad (Award No: 451 of 2025). This case not only reaffirmed the Bank's right to exercise managerial prerogative during probation but also underscored the importance of clear performance expectations and structured assessments for senior-level probationers. Brief Facts The claimant, Syed A Faris Aljunid, was employed as a Senio

The jurisprudence surrounding the need for a domestic inquiry prior to dismissing an employee has traversed a complex and evolving path. The question of how the Industrial Court should address an employer’s failure to hold a domestic inquiry or to conduct one that is free from any procedural defect remains an unresolved issue. Domestic inquiry serves as a cornerstone of procedural fairness in the workplace, ensuring accountability and adherence to the principles of natural ju

Recently, the Court of Appeal in the Woon Kim Choy case clarified the legal position that a person may, at the same time, be both a director and an employee of the company if a valid and separate contract of employment exists. The court held that “ There is nothing incompatible between a person exercising his role as an executive director of the company and at the same time having a contract of employment with the company. The two positions and their respective roles and

Recently, our Senior Associate, Muhamad Sharulnizam Mohd Roni, successfully represented the company in Rahimuddin Bin Md Harun v Darul Khusus Venture Sdn Bhd, where this case underscores the importance of setting performance expectation of probationers by the employer. This ruling further clarifies the distinction between non-confirmation of a probationary employee and constructive dismissal. Brief Facts The claimant (Rahimuddin Bin Md Harun) was dismissed by the company on 3

In a unanimous decision, the Federal Court reaffirmed the applicable test for determining constructive dismissal in the case of Tan Lay Peng v RHB Bank Bhd & Anor [2024] 6 CLJ 315. The sole question of law posed before the apex court was whether there was a difference in the contract test or reasonableness test in light of the major developments in the industrial court jurisprudence. The Background Facts This case involved one Mr Tan Leong Huat (Mr Tan), a former employee o

The topic of sexual harassment in the workplace is still a prevalent topic to date. Research has shown that chronic stress caused by harassment at the workplace can contribute to mental and physical health problems. Workplace discrimination and harassment is a serious phenomenon. This alert explores the various avenues provided for an employee to explore in the face of workplace sexual harassment and how employers can ensure these issues are eliminated. Sexual Harassment

Recently, the Court of Appeal in Gopala Krishnan Chettiar a/l Muthu v Sealand Marine Inspection and Testing (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor [2023] 4 MLJ 445 provided some insight as to whether a director and shareholder of a company is also a ‘workman’ in accordance with the definition in Section 2 of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (IRA 1967). The issue in this case was whether a person who holds a position as a director and shareholder of a company is entitled to initiate a claim for