MENTERI SUMBER MANUSIA MALAYSIA v 1. ) National Union of Bank Employees (NUBE) 2. ) KETUA PENGARAH PERHUBUNGAN PERUSAHAAN 3. ) MALAYAN COMMERCIAL BANKS' ASSOCIATION 4. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA 5. ) Jabatan Peguam Negara PIHAK TERKILAN 1. ) Tan Eng Hong 2. ) Abdul Jamil Bin Haji Jalaludeen

Case Significance

Confirms that the Minister of Human Resources must genuinely address the parties' agreed internal settlement mechanism and satisfy the section 26 preconditions of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 before referring a trade dispute to the Industrial Court; a referral that bypasses those requirements was quashed on judicial review.

This High Court decision concerns an application for judicial review by the National Union of Bank Employees (NUBE) challenging decisions of the Minister of Human Resources to refer two trade disputes between the union and the Malayan Commercial Banks' Association (MCBA) to the Industrial Court. The dispute grew out of a "Festival Aid" arrangement: under a Memorandum of Agreement, the member banks had agreed to pay an amount equivalent to one month's salary as festival aid to union members, which was paid in 2023 but not in 2024. The case is a useful illustration of the statutory limits on the Minister's power of reference under the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (IRA 1967).

The court examined whether the Minister had acted contrary to sub-section 26(3) of the IRA 1967 by failing to address his mind to the internal settlement mechanism the parties had agreed in Article 4(5) of the 19th Collective Agreement, and by forming an opinion that this mechanism would not achieve settlement without sufficiently satisfying himself of that. It also considered whether the Minister had undermined the ongoing conciliation process, and whether he had acted contrary to sub-section 26(2) by referring the 20th Collective Agreement dispute to the Industrial Court without the applicant's consent, bypassing the internal remedial process.

The court found for the union on the pleaded grounds. It allowed the prayers seeking certiorari to quash the Minister's referral decisions, together with the alternative relief that the internal negotiation process between the union and the MCBA under Article 4(5) of the 19th Collective Agreement should continue. It rejected a further argument that the union sought to raise, holding it was not open to the applicant to advance grounds not pleaded in the statement filed under Order 53 rule 3(2) of the Rules of Court 2012. The successful prayers were allowed with costs of RM10,000 to be paid by the MCBA, with no order as to costs against the Minister and the Director General of Industrial Relations.

The judgment is significant for confirming that the Minister must genuinely apply his mind to an agreed internal settlement mechanism before referring a trade dispute to the Industrial Court, and that a referral made without satisfying the statutory preconditions in section 26 may be quashed.