ZULMAJDI MOHAMAD & ANOR v. PETROFAC (MALAYSIA-PM304) LTD
INDUSTRIAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
PARAMALINGAM J DORAISAMY
AWARD NO. 1497 OF 2026 [CASE NO: 22-4-2678-21]
26 AUGUST 2026
Abstract – A dismissal for poor performance is with just cause or excuse where (i) the employee was sufficiently warned and informed of performance shortcomings, whether through appraisal ratings, formal performance improvement plan (‘PIP’) documentation, or supervisory emails highlighting deficiencies and requesting rectification; (ii) the employee was accorded adequate time, reasonable opportunities, structured monitoring, and sufficient supervisory guidance to improve, including extensions of a PIP to accommodate changes in work duties or environments; and (iii) the employee failed to reach the required standards or achieve key performance milestones despite the support and opportunity provided. An employee who willingly participates in a PIP, acknowledges its terms without contemporaneous objection, and fails to raise documentary protest cannot subsequently claim a lack of warning or inadequate guidance to invalidate the termination.
CHONG KAM PENG v. OUNG MILLION HARDWARE (M) SDN BHD
INDUSTRIAL COURT, IPOH
D SUNITA KAUR JESSY
AWARD NO. 1615 OF 2026 [CASE NO: 10-4-973-24]
18 SEPTEMBER 2026
Abstract – An employer is justified in summarily dismissing an employee where the employee exhibits persistent recalcitrance, deliberate disobedience of management instructions and disruptive behaviour that impairs operations and destroys the fundamental relationship of trust and confidence. The lack of a formal show cause letter or domestic inquiry does not invalidate the dismissal if the employer successfully proves the employee’s misconduct on a balance of probabilities.
