Justice Hayatul Akmal Abdul Aziz said Wong Forklift Hire & Services Sdn Bhd had failed to meet the legal requirements necessary to succeed in a judicial review application.
“I find the applicant company has failed to discharge its burden to establish its case. The facts of this case are not disputed, and neither is the relationship between the parties,” she said in a 22-page judgment released recently.
Hayatul, now a Court of Appeal judge, said Industrial Court chairman D Paramalingam did not err in finding that Wong Jun Kiat had been constructively dismissed from the company.
Hayatul said the company had arbitrarily and unilaterally reduced Wong’s salary and that his wages for February and March 2019 were not paid. The judge also found that the company had failed to remit the statutory contributions towards EPF and Perkeso for his benefit.
“No work was assigned to him with no lawful justification, which he took as being placed in ‘cold storage’,” she added.
Hayatul said Wong was entitled to walk out of his employment, having met all the criteria under the “contract test” to establish a constructive dismissal.
She ordered the company to pay Wong RM6,000 in costs.
The company has since filed an appeal against the High Court decision.
Stepmother reduced Wong’s salary after father’s death
In his award, Paramalingam had found that company director Sim Foo Yoke, Wong’s stepmother, had wrongfully reduced his salary seven months after the death of his father.
“The salary reduction was first imposed commencing October 2018. It is certainly no coincidence that the Shah Alam High Court suit, wherein the claimant (Wong) challenged the will of his late father, was also filed in October 2018.
“As pleaded by the claimant, the salary reduction was a retaliation by Sim against the claimant for having filed the suit (to contest the will),” the award read.
Paramalingam found that the company had unilaterally reduced Wong’s salary from approximately RM27,500 to RM9,000, and later RM6,000 per month, which, he said, was a “fundamental breach” of the employment contract.
He found that Wong was not consulted before the salary reduction was imposed.
Wong acted reasonably, without delay
Paramalingam also found that Wong had acted “reasonably” and in a “timely manner” after he was not paid his salary for February and March 2019 by demanding the restoration of his full salary the following month, which the company failed to do.
He said an order for reinstatement to employment was inappropriate due to a total breakdown of trust, confidence and familial relationship between Sim and Wong.
“The company director (Sim) could not see eye-to-eye after Wong initiated a suit questioning the last will of his late father,” said Paramalingam.
Wong was awarded compensation in lieu of reinstatement for RM550,000 and another RM660,000 in back wages, subject to a deduction of RM198,000 on account of post-dismissal earnings.
Lawyer Yap Teck Hui and Gan Soon Ong appeared for the company while Justin Chin represented Wong in the High Court proceedings.