1. ) PHILIP PHANG KIN MING 2. ) GUNASEKAR A/L MARIAPPAN v M JETS INTERNATIONAL SDN BHD

Case Significance

Confirms that the Labour Office's jurisdiction under section 69 of the Employment Act 1955 is ousted where a wage claim is factually interwoven with an unfair-dismissal reference before the Industrial Court, which is the comprehensive forum, so as to avoid duplicity of proceedings and conflicting decisions.

This Court of Appeal decision concerns whether the Labour Office retains jurisdiction over an unpaid-wages claim once the same dispute, in substance, has been referred to the Industrial Court. The appellants had been appointed chief finance officer and managing director of the respondent company on substantial salaries, later increased in a manner the respondent alleged was done without proper board approval. In February 2023 the respondent suspended both on grounds of alleged misconduct, the suspension letters stipulating that they would continue to receive full salaries, but it then failed to pay their salaries for February and March 2023 despite repeated follow-ups and further extensions of the suspension. The appellants lodged a complaint for unpaid wages with the Labour Office, and after their employment was terminated in April 2023 they also filed for unfair dismissal in the Industrial Court under the Industrial Relations Act 1967. The Labour Office ruled in their favour on the wage claim, ordering the respondent to pay MYR264,000 with interest under section 69 of the Employment Act 1955. The High Court set that decision aside, and the appellants appealed. The Court of Appeal held that the Labour Office's jurisdiction was ousted because the wage claim was factually interwoven with the unfair-dismissal reference before the Industrial Court — the validity of the salary increases, the existence of misconduct, whether the dismissal was with just cause, and the computation of back wages — and allowing parallel adjudication would risk conflicting decisions and undermine the coherence and finality of the dispute-resolution process. The Industrial Court, with its wide remedial powers including back wages, compensation and consideration of the suspensions, was the appropriate and comprehensive forum. Although the High Court judge had ventured further than necessary into the merits, which properly lay with the Industrial Court, her ultimate conclusion that the Labour Office had erred was sound in law. The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal with costs.