MOHD IKHSAN BIN YAACOB v 1. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA 2. ) PERAK AGRO MANAGEMENT SERVICES SDN BHD

aa-25-10-09-2023 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 16 November 2025 • AA-25-10-09/2023 • 2 min read

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Parties (3)

Case Significance

A judicial review of an Industrial Court constructive-dismissal award, addressing whether allowances count as last drawn salary, entitlement to gratuity and retirement benefits, and the 24-month backwages cap.

This High Court decision concerns an application for judicial review challenging an award of the Industrial Court in a constructive-dismissal claim, and in particular the Industrial Court's assessment of the compensation payable to the employee. The employee, having succeeded before the Industrial Court on the question of constructive dismissal, invoked the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Order 53 of the Rules of Court 2012 to challenge aspects of the monetary award.

Several distinct questions arose about the calculation of the remedy. The first was whether allowances received by the employee formed part of his "last drawn salary" for the purpose of computing backwages and compensation, a question that determines the multiplicand from which the award is built. The second was whether an employee who succeeds on constructive dismissal is entitled to gratuity and retirement benefits in addition to backwages and compensation in lieu of reinstatement. These questions were governed by section 30(6A) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 and the Second Schedule to that Act, which structure the Industrial Court's discretion in awarding remedies, together with the established principle that backwages for a workman are subject to a statutory cap of twenty-four months. Overarching all of this was the limited nature of the supervisory jurisdiction: on judicial review the High Court does not sit in appeal over the Industrial Court's assessment but examines whether the award was reached lawfully, within jurisdiction and without error of law, error apparent on the face of the record, or unreasonableness.

The judgment is a useful illustration of how the courts approach a judicial review of an Industrial Court remedial award — the treatment of allowances within last-drawn salary, the availability of gratuity and retirement benefits alongside backwages and compensation, the twenty-four-month cap on backwages, and the confined scope of supervisory intervention under Order 53.

What aspects of the Industrial Court award were challenged?

The employee challenged whether allowances formed part of his last drawn salary for computing the award, and whether success on constructive dismissal entitled him to gratuity and retirement benefits in addition to backwages and compensation, engaging section 30(6A) and the Second Schedule of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 and the 24-month cap on backwages.

What was the scope of the Court's review?

On judicial review under Order 53 the High Court does not sit in appeal over the Industrial Court's assessment but examines whether the award was made lawfully, within jurisdiction and without error of law or unreasonableness.

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (aa-25-10-09-2023)