Under Section 20 of the Industrial Relations Act 1967, an ex-employee may make a representation to the Director General for Industrial Relations if he considers that his employment was dismissed without just cause or excuse by his employer. This representation must be filed within 60 days from the date of dismissal. In the event reconciliation between parties is unsuccessful, the Minister of Human Resources may, if he thinks fit, refer the representation to the Industrial Court for determination. The ex-employee may seek for reinstatement of his employment or compensation and backwages of up to 24 months (or 12 months for probationers).

In the Industrial Court, the employer will have to prove that he had just cause and excuse for dismissing the claimant, and that the dismissal was done in good faith. Grounds for dismissal include misconduct, breach of fiduciary duties, insubordination, sexual harassment, poor performance and retrenchment. Unfair dismissal also includes constructive dismissal.

The Industrial Court hearing is typically conducted in the manner of a trial whereby the parties call witnesses and produce documentary evidence to support their case.

Our Services

Our services and support include, but is not limited to the following areas:

  • Advising employers/employees on their rights, remedies and the strengths of their case.
  • Drafting and assisting employees in lodging representations of unfair dismissal to the Director General.
  • Drafting and negotiating amicable settlements for employers/employees prior to or even in the course of Industrial Court proceedings.
  • Representing employers/employees in Industrial Court proceedings.

Our Experience

  • Succesfully represented an employee who was dismissed by the employer (“Company”) without providing any reasons whatsoever in the letter of termination. During legal proceedings, the Company then alleged that our client had agreed to and signed a new contract for service with the Company. Our client denies this and disputes the authenticity of the signature appearing on the alleged contract of service purported to be his. The Court agreed with our submissions that our client never signed the alleged contract and therefore his dismissal by the Company was without just cause and excuse.
  • Represented employees who were dismissed by the employer (“Company”) on alleged grounds of attempting to set up a competing business, misconduct and sexual harassment respectively, to which our clients deny. Our clients took the position that their dismissal was without just cause or excuse because (i) the Company had announced their dismissal before they had the opportunity to reply to the show cause letters issued to them, (ii) the subsequent termination letters only contained the allegation of attempting to set up a competing business and therefore (iii) the other allegations are afterthoughts and mala fide.
  • Representing a smartphone company from China in the Industrial Court to oppose a former employee’s claim for unfair dismissal. The former employee was dismissed by our client for, amongst others, gross misconduct, including breach of fiduciary duties, causing damage and disrepute to our client’s image and insubordination.
  • Advising an electronics company in respect of terminating an employee on the ground of retirement. Our client had employed the employee when he was above the age of 60, and continued to employ him past the age of 70. The employment contract also does not contain a mandatory retirement age clause.
  • Represented a hypermarket company in the Industrial Court to oppose former employees’ claims for unfair dismissal. The former employees were dismsised by our client for, amongst others, misconduct, sexual harassment, insubordination and absentism respectively. Amicable settlements between parties were sucessfully negotiated thereafter.

Related Services

Reviews & Testimonials

  • “I had the opportunity to work with John Chan and Jasmine Wong for an industrial relations (IR) case. Pure professionalism, no hanky-panky, attentive and proactive in working towards our company’s best interest. Am truly pleased the case ended on a good note.” – Mr T, Malaysian subsidiary company of an Australian corporation
Raymond Mah
Managing Partner
Diana Cheak
John Chan
Jasmine Wong
Eric Toh
Janessa Kok
Anis Mohd Sohaimi

Related Articles and Updates

Friday, 16 April, 2021 3:00 pm – 3:45 pm Data Privacy in Malaysia – Does…

MahWengKwai & Associates’ Online Talks are presented by video conference to inculcate knowledge and awareness…

By Tommy Wong The Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (“the…

Wednesday, 18 December, 2019 12:30pm – 2:30pm    Doing Business In Malaysia (Download pdf brochure )…

By Eric Toh On 6 November 2019, Asia Law Portal issued an article entitled “Some…

Introduction This is a dispute between the plaintiff  (“Plaintiff”) and four defendants namely the first…

[contact-form-7 id=”” title=”Menu-Practice areas”]