BATA (M) BHD.V NORMADIAH BT. ABU SUOOD [1991] 2 ILR 1106

It is a principle of law that a forced resignation is a dismissal.

QUAH SWEE KHOON V SIME DARBY SDN. BHD [2001] 1 CLJ 9 p.19&20

An employer does not like a workman.He does not want to dismiss him and face the consequences.He wants to ease the workman out of his organization.He wants to make the process as painless as possible for himself.He usually employs the subtlest of means.He may, under the guise of exercising the management power of transfer, demote the workmen.....

WOODS V WM CAR SERVICES [1981] ICR page 666

In our view it is clearly established that there is implied in a contract of employment a term that the employers will not,without reasonable and proper cause, conduct themselves in a manner calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence between employer and employee. Caurtlands Northeren Textiles v Andrew [1979] IRLR 84. To constitute a breach of this implied term it is not necessary to show that the employer intended any repudiation of the contract;the tribunal's function is to look at the employers conduct as a whole and determine whether it is such that its effect, judged reasonably and sensibly,is such that the employee cannot be expected to put up with it;British Aircraft Corporation v Austin [1878] IRLR 347. The conduct of the parties has to be looked at as a whole and its cumulative impact assessed. Post office v Roberts.

TAKING LEAVE

ZARINA ATAN V KERJURUTERAAN WARISAN TEKENIK SDN. BHD
[2009] 1 MLJ IX
The Company approved the Claimants leave for only 5 days but she took 15 days to celebrate her marriage.
The Industrial Court held: "It is incumbent upon an employee before going on leave, to ensure that the Company had granted the application for leave because it is at the absolute discretion of the Company.The employee cannot be absent from work and then apply for leave."
Posted

PAN GLOBAL TEXTILES BHD, PULAU PINANG V ANG BENG TEIK

[2002]2 MLJ 27

"

The Federal Court stated that no employee could claim leave of absence as
a matter of right without any permission granted for the same."

HARAPAN RAMAI SDN. BHD V, JOHOR V YAJADESAN RAMAN

[1997] 3 ILR 410

"An employees right to annual leave cannot be claimed as of right and he must obtain the permission the employer relieving him from attending work

."

ABDUL AZID DESA V MALASIA TRAVEL BUSINESS SDN. BHD [2007]3 ILR

INDUSTRIAL COURT,PULAU LANGKAWI
Held in favour of the Claimant and disallowing the Company's application to transfer this matter to the KL Industrial Court.
Learned Counsel for the Company contended that the Claimant had failed to produce any documentary evidence to show that he had been facing financial constraints and that he could not afford to go down to KL and as such S 114(g) EA 1950 ought to have been invoked against him.
It is trite law that the strict rules as embodied in the EA ought not to be applied rigidly to industrial adjudication and that equity and good conscience ought to prevail where justice demanded it.

Judge: Md. Amin Firdaus Abdullah
Posted