Mohammad Aidil Versus. Majubina Consultancy Sdn. Bhd. Selangor Labour Court (2016) in the case of…

Mohammad Aidil Versus. Majubina Consultancy Sdn. Bhd.

Selangor Labour Court (2016) in the case of Mohammad Aidil (the claimant) versus Majubina Consultancy Sdn. Bhd. has recently granted an award in favour of the claimant, including punitive compensation in lieu of reinstatement. Before the judgement was made, a test was used to identify Mohammad Aidil’s employment status with the company and it was proven that he is an employee of the company based on the high amount of control that the company has towards him in terms of employment. The claimant was terminated from the employment on the basis that his position had been made redundant due to retrenchment. The Claimant was the only employee in the Company who was dismissed at that material point in time. After his termination took place, another individual which is a foreigner was then appointed to hold the role of his position.

Question 1

An understanding that there are few types of employment contract is really important and to identify an individual’s employment status, it will be done through a test by the Labour Court before a judgement is made.

a) Please explain why the test is considered as very important in identifying an individual’s employment status and what is the possible implication if the court found out that an individual is not a ‘worker’ of a company? (3 marks)

b) Based on the case above, please explain the type of test used by the Labour Court towards Mohammad Aidil which makes the court successfully identified him as a worker of the company (2 marks)