Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm

Menu

EMPLOYMENT – CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL VIA TRANSFER: WHEN MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVE CROSSES THE LINE

1. Summary and Facts

In Sahurunzaman bin Barun v Perodua Sales Sdn Bhd & Anor [2025] 2 MLJ 17, three long-serving Perodua employees – Saharunzaman (OKU), Noramidah, and Mohd Razif – refused to resign from their permanent roles to accept a two-year contract with Perodua’s associate company, Nagoya Automobile Malaysia (NAM). In retaliation, Perodua abruptly transferred them to faraway branches (Kota Kinabalu, Kuching, Kuala Terengganu) with only three days’ notice, disregarding their personal circumstances, including medical issues and dependent family members.

They challenged the move as constructive dismissal. The Industrial Court ruled in their favour, but the High Court overturned the decision. The matter reached the Court of Appeal.

2. Legal issues

• Whether Perodua’s transfer orders were unreasonable and issued in mala fide to force the appellants out of employment?
• Whether the Industrial Court applied the correct test in finding constructive dismissal – i.e. the “contract test” versus the “reasonableness test”?
• Whether Perodua’s failure to secure work permits for Sabah and Sarawak postings breached the employment contracts?
• Whether the transfer orders constituted a fundamental breach of the employment contracts?

3. Court’s Findings

• The Industrial Court correctly applied the contract test, not the reasonableness test. Because the contract expressly required transfers to be “reasonably directed”, reasonableness was part of the contract term and therefore reviewable.
• The transfer orders were mala fide, intended to pressure the appellants into resignation without payment of lay-off or termination benefits. This constituted a fundamental breach of the employment contract.
• Perodua failed to apply for necessary work permits for postings to Sabah and Sarawak. Requiring employees to report for duty without permits was illegal and a breach going to the root of the contract.
• Perodua could not show genuine operational need for the transfers, nor did it provide evidence of alternative branches being full. Transfers appeared punitive rather than business-driven.
• The Industrial Court’s decision was reinstated. Each claimant was awarded compensation in lieu of reinstatement and backwages, with costs.

4. Practical Implications

Employers must exercise contractual transfer powers reasonably and in good faith. Where transfers are used as a tool to compel resignation or as retaliation, courts may find constructive dismissal and award compensation accordingly.

Back to Latest Legal Updates

Recent Post

LEGAL UPDATES – THE SILENT CURVE: WHY MEDICAL PREMIUMS SUDDENLY SPIKE

Medical insurance premiums do not increase gradually. They rise exponentially. For many years, costs appear manageable, giving policyholders a false sense of stability. However, once the insured reaches their mid-60s, medical charges begin to accelerate sharply, and after age 70, they often outpace the premiums by several multiples.

This happens because medical insurance is funded from a finite pool of money – an investment “bucket” – while the medical rider functions like an engine that consumes more fuel as the insured ages. When the engine grows faster than the bucket can be replenished, depletion is inevitable. The result is sudden premium hikes, demands for top-ups, or policy lapse – not due to misconduct or missed payments, but due to the structural design of the product itself.

Read More »
8 February ,2026 尚無留言

THE ‘COVER UNTIL 99’ MYTH – WHY INSURANCE AGENTS GET IT WRONG

Consumers must stop relying on what insurance agents say and start reading what insurance policies actually provide. ‘Medical cover until 99’ does not mean guaranteed coverage at an affordable premium. In reality, medical insurance charges rise exponentially after age 70, often making the policy mathematically unsustainable. By the time policyholders realise this, they are told to top up tens of thousands of ringgit or lose coverage altogether.

Read More »
8 February ,2026 尚無留言

STRATA TITLES ACT – DEVELOPER MUST ACCOUNT FOR COMMON PROPERTY COMPENSATION: HIGH COURT IMPOSES CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST

In JMB Kelana Square v Perantara Properties Sdn Bhd & Ors [2025] 12 MLJ 51, the High Court held that a developer who received compensation for land compulsorily acquired for the LRT 3 project could not retain sums attributable to common property. Although the compensation was paid entirely to the developer as registered proprietor, the Court found that part of the acquired land constituted common property, and the developer therefore held RM6.05 million on constructive trust for the Joint Management Body. The decision affirms that JMBs have proprietary standing to recover compensation for common property and that courts will intervene to prevent unjust enrichment in strata developments.

Read More »
1 February ,2026 尚無留言

UNFAIR DISMISSAL – MEDICAL LEAVE IS NOT MISCONDUCT: HIGH COURT UPHOLDS INDUSTRIAL COURT’S PROTECTION OF SICK EMPLOYEE

In Aerodarat Services Sdn Bhd v Lawerance Raj a/l Arrulsamy & Anor [2025] 11 MLJ 26, the High Court dismissed an employer’s judicial review and affirmed that prolonged medical leave does not, by itself, amount to misconduct justifying dismissal. The Court held that the employer failed to prove the critical element of intention not to return to work or unwillingness to perform contractual duties, despite high absenteeism caused by serious illness and surgery. The ruling reinforces that employers must distinguish between genuine illness and misconduct, and cannot rely on medical absence alone to terminate employment.

Read More »
1 February ,2026 尚無留言

WILL AND PROBATE – COURT OF APPEAL INVALIDATES WILL OF 97-YEAR-OLD TESTATOR: CAPACITY, SUSPICION AND UNDUE INFLUENCE PROVED

In Kong Kin Lay & Ors v Kong Kin Siong & Ors [2025] 5 MLJ 891, the Court of Appeal set aside a will executed by a 97-year-old testator, holding that there was real doubt as to testamentary capacity, compounded by serious suspicious circumstances and undue influence by certain beneficiaries. The Court emphasised that while the “golden rule” is not a rule of law, failure to obtain medical confirmation of capacity where doubt exists is a grave omission. Credibility issues with the drafting solicitor, beneficiary involvement in the will’s preparation, and suppression of evidence led the Court to declare the will invalid and order intestacy.

Read More »
1 February ,2026 尚無留言

NOT AN ‘AGREEMENT TO AGREE’: ENGLISH COURT OF APPEAL SAVES LONG-TERM SUPPLY CONTRACT DESPITE OPEN PRICE CLAUSE

In KSY Juice Blends UK Ltd v Citrosuco GmbH [2025] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 581, the UK Court of Appeal held that a long-term supply contract was not unenforceable merely because part of the price was stated as “open price to be fixed”. The Court implied a term that, in the absence of agreement, the price would be a reasonable or market price, noting that the product’s value could be objectively benchmarked against the market price of frozen concentrated orange juice. Emphasising that courts should preserve commercial bargains rather than destroy them, the decision confirms that section 8(2) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 operates as a saving provision, not a bar to enforceability.

Read More »
1 February ,2026 尚無留言
zh_TWZH
en_USEN ms_MYMY zh_TWZH
× 联系我们