MADIAHLAGAN A/L SUNDARAM v LOTUSS STORES (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD

aa-16a-9-09-2023 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 14 October 2024 • AA-16A-9-09/2023 • 30 min read

13 cases cited (0 SG, 13 foreign)

Outcome

The Appellant’s appeal is dismissed with cost of RM6,000.00 is to be paid by the Appellant to the Respondent.

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (aa-16a-9-09-2023). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

CIVIL APPEAL: An appeal by the Appellant against the Industrial Court’s decision – The Industrial Court dismissed the Appellant’s claim - Whether the Industrial court was right when decided that the sexual misconduct complained of by the company as the ground for dismissal was in fact committed by the Appellant - Whether the Industrial Court had failed to decide the evidence tendered was hearsay evidence and thus inadmissible - Whether the Industrial Court was right when decided that such ground constitutes just cause or excuse for the dismissal.

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure Employment & Industrial Relations

Judges (1)

Abdul Wahab bin Mohamed Delivered

Counsel (5)

Ayleswary Firm Shearn Delamore & Co. Firm Ayleswary a/p Bathamanathan Counsel Appellant Peter H. Santiago Counsel Respondent Vijayan Venugopal Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

LOTUSS STORES Sdn Bhd Respondent Madiahlagan a/l Sundaram Appellant

Statutes Cited

Employment Act 1955 (Cap 265)

Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)

Cases Cited (13)

MY (13)

[1995] 2 AMR 2145 [1995] 2 MLJ 753 [1995] 3 CLJ 344 [1996] 1 MLJ 481 [1996] 3 AMR 3181 [1997] 1 CLJ 665 [2003] 2 MLJ 97 [2006] 2 CLJ 337 [2008] 6 MLJ 237 [2015] 4 CLJ 295 [2016] 4 AMR 256 [2016] 4 MLJ 282 [2016] 6 CLJ 346

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (aa-16a-9-09-2023)