 |
||
|
||
LATEST CASES (ILR Issue 11 of 2025) |
||
|
SUBJECT INDEX ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Judicial review – Certiorari – Appeal – Challenge against awards of Industrial
Court – Application to bring in or replace non-employer corporate entity in
proceedings – Overlap in directors, registered address, company secretaries
or managerial personnel – Industrial Court ordered substitution and joinder
– High Court dismissed applications for judicial review – Whether Industrial
Court erred in allowing substitution and joinder – Whether awards ought to
be quashed CIVIL PROCEDURE Costs – Industrial Court – Employee dismissed from employment – Claim
by employee against employer for unlawful dismissal – Parties sought costs
to be awarded – Practice in Industrial Court – Whether costs ought to be
awarded – Whether exceptional case necessitating costs – Whether conduct
of parties questionable – Industrial Relations Regulations 1967, reg. 5 Pleadings – Industrial law – Claim for unlawful dismissal – Employee
dismissed from employment – Dishonesty in performance of duty, unfit for
work and making false declaration of job skill or work-related record when
applying for employment – Whether grounds of dismissal based on
termination letter sufficiently pleaded by employer – Whether employer
raised unpleaded issues which were not reasons for dismissal stated in
termination letter – Whether issues raised by employer outside termination
letter ought to be considered COMPANY LAW Separate legal entity – Piercing of corporate veil – Power of Industrial Court
to add or substitute parties – Application to bring in or replace non-employer
corporate entity in proceedings – Overlap in directors, registered address,
company secretaries or managerial personnel – Whether parties to
proceedings before Industrial Court may use s. 29(a) of Industrial Relations
Act 1967 to bring in/replace non-employer corporate entity in proceedings
– Whether Industrial Court can override/ignore separate legal personality
doctrine under company law – Salomon v. A Salomon & Co Ltd CONTRACT Employment contract – Fixed-term contract – Non-renewal – Terms and
conditions – Strategic leadership role – Claimant notified of non-renewal of
contract during block leave – Whether employment had reached natural end
upon expiry of term – Whether contract entered into genuine fixed-term
contract – Whether façade for permanent employment COURTS Industrial Court – Powers – Power to add/substitute parties – Application
to bring in or replace non-employer corporate entity in proceedings –
Overlap in directors, registered address, company secretaries or managerial
personnel – Whether Industrial Court, guided by equitable mandate, can
override/ignore separate legal personality doctrine under company law and
impose liability on non-employer company – Industrial Relations Act 1967,
ss. 29(a) & 30(5) LABOUR LAW Employment – Dismissal – Misconduct – Allegations of sexual harassment,
workplace harassment and/or actions unbefitting of manager and contrary to
employer’s values – Employee dismissed from employment – Whether
charges proven – Whether employee dismissed with just cause or excuse –
Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5) Employment – Dismissal – Misconduct – Breach of safety procedures –
COVID-19 pandemic – Failure to take antigen test and lying about test
results – Employee dismissed from employment – Whether misconduct
complained of established – Whether misconduct warranted dismissal –
Whether punishment of dismissal proportionate to misconduct committed –
Whether dismissal with just cause or excuse – Industrial Relations Act 1967,
ss. 20(3), 30(5) & 30(6) Employment – Dismissal – Misconduct – Claimant served as Executive
Chef at hotel – Hotel had five events in one day – One event attended by
Prime Minister – Claimant pressured by hotel’s Outlet Manager – Claimant
held Outlet Manager’s face and told him not to disturb – Claimant later
charged for holding and grasping fellow employee – Claimant found guilty
and dismissed from employment – Whether claimant committed alleged
misconduct – Whether punishment of dismissal proportionate to alleged misconduct – Whether hotel considered mitigating circumstances in meting
out punishment of dismissal – Whether dismissal done with just cause or
excuse – Whether there was contributory misconduct by claimant –
Industrial Relations Act 1967 Employment – Dismissal – Misconduct – Dishonesty – Employee charged
for falsifying various service and job sheets, manipulating machine data,
stealing/unlawfully retaining company parts and ordering non-compatible
parts – Multiple incidents resulting in financial loss to employer – Employee
dismissed from employment – Whether charges proven – Whether domestic
inquiry complied with rules of natural justice – Whether employee dismissed
with just cause or excuse – Whether dismissal warranted – Industrial
Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5) Employment – Dismissal – Misconduct – Engaging or ‘moonlighting’ in
property rental and sale or other personal activities – Conducted other
business during working hours and interfered with renting, sale and purchase
of property – Employee dismissed from employment – Whether misconduct
complained of established – Whether misconduct constituted just cause or
excuse for dismissal – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 30(5) Employment – Employment contract – Fixed-term contract – Non-renewal
– Strategic leadership role – Claimant notified of non-renewal of contract
during block leave – Intention of parties – Employer’s conduct during course
of employment – Nature of employer’s business and work performed by
claimant – Whether claimant aware of non-renewal – Whether employment
had reached natural end upon expiry of term – Whether non-renewal of
contract constituted dismissal – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(1) Employment – Dismissal – Misconduct – Personal remarks made on social
media posting – Allegation by employer that employee made inappropriate
remarks about work and colleagues on social media account – Postings made
privately, limited to employee’s circle of friends, not open to public and
made outside working hours – Employee dismissed from employment –
Balance between employer’s managerial prerogative and employee’s right to
privacy – Whether postings caused actual or demonstrable harm to
employer’s reputation or operations – Whether there was public accessibility
or dissemination beyond employee’s private circle – Whether remarks in postings false, malicious or defamatory – Whether postings constituted
misconduct warranting dismissal – Whether penalty of dismissal
proportionate to act complained of – Whether employee dismissed with just
cause or excuse – Whether there was contributory misconduct by employee
– Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5) Employment – Dismissal – Misconduct – Rude, insolent and disrespectful
behaviour at workplace – Making/uttering disrespectful remarks to superior
– Employee dismissed from employment – Whether languages and
expressions used by employee constituted insolent or disrespectful conduct
towards superior – Whether conduct sufficiently serious to justify dismissal
– Principle of proportionality – Whether employer could have imposed
lesser disciplinary sanction – Whether there was contributory misconduct by
employee – Whether dismissal with just cause or excuse – Industrial
Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(6A) Employment – Dismissal – Unlawful termination – Employee dismissed
from employment – Dishonesty in performance of duty, unfit for work and
making false declaration of job skill or work-related record when applying
for employment – Whether allegations proven – Whether supported by
evidence – Whether employee issued with show cause letter – Whether there
was domestic inquiry – Whether employee dismissed with just cause or
excuse – Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5) Procedure – Substitution/joinder – Application to bring in or replace nonemployer
corporate entity in proceedings – Overlap in directors, registered
address, company secretaries or managerial personnel – Criterion and
required test – Whether proposed additional party played any role in dispute
– Whether there was reasonable factual/legal nexus to dispute – Whether
proposed party liable in law for termination –Whether parties to proceedings
before Industrial Court may use s. 29(a) of Industrial Relations Act 1967 to
bring in/replace non-employer corporate entity in proceedings – Whether
more expansive reading of joinder and substitution, adopted in case laws,
stretched statutory interpretation and core principles of corporate law
beyond statutorily authorised – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 29(a) |
||
|
