 The Malaysian Federal Court in the case of Unilever (M) Holdings Sdn Bhd v So Lai & Anor1 has issued a landmark ruling whereby it was held that an employee who had been wrongfully dismissed could not be awarded compensation in lieu of reinstatement, as he had already reached the retirement age by the time the case had been decided. The facts The employer, being dissatisfied with the decision, filed for judicial review of the decision of the Industrial Court, and for the award to be quashed. Although the employer’s application was dismissed, the award for backwages was reduced to 14 months instead, bearing in mind that the employee’s retirement age was 55. On appeal, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant’s appeal and reaffirmed the High Court’s decision. The appellant appealed to the Federal Court. |
 The issues The issues before the Federal Court were as follows, namely whether compensation in lieu of reinstatement should be awarded to a person who could not be reinstated; and whether the issue of reinstatement even arose in this case, since the employee had already passed his retirement age of 55, at the time of the filing of the claim. The decision If an employee could not be reinstated because his age was past mandatory retirement, the issue of compensation does not arise. Furthermore, since reinstatement is a form of specific performance, it could only be ordered in a situation where there was a legal basis for such performance. Conclusion –––––– |
ZUL RAFIQUE & partners
D3-3-8 Solaris Dutamas, No 1 Jalan Dutamas 1
50480 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Tel: (60) 3 6209 8228
Fax: (60) 3 6209 8221
Email: mariette.peters@zulrafique.com.my
amylia.soraya@zulrafique.com.my
www.zulrafique.com.my
Zul Rafique & Partners
Dato’ Zulkifly Rafique
