No Hearing Is Not An Automatic Win
Why skipping the internal hearing does not by itself make your dismissal unlawful.
What the case decided
Dreamland Corporation (M) Sdn Bhd v Choong Chin Sooi was decided by the Supreme Court in 1988. It is reported in the Malayan Law Journal (MLJ) at [1988] 1 MLJ 111.
It confirms that a missing internal hearing does not settle a dismissal case.
The court held that an irregularity in, or the outright absence of, a domestic inquiry is not fatal to the employer.
The employer may still justify the dismissal before the Industrial Court by proving the misconduct there.1
What the principle means plainly
The domestic inquiry is a procedural step, not the final word. Even without it, the employer can still argue its case at the Industrial Court.
This case came earlier than, and lines up with, Wong Yuen Hock v Hong Leong Assurance on the same point.
What it means for a worker
If you were dismissed with no proper domestic inquiry, use that fact to support your case, not to end your preparation there.
The employer still has to prove, on the evidence, that your dismissal had just cause or excuse. That burden is one of your strongest advantages going into a claim.2
Where this fits in a claim
This principle applies whenever a worker faces a misconduct dismissal without a proper internal hearing beforehand.
The Industrial Court still hears the full evidence. Every outcome depends on those facts, and no result is promised.
Acting on time matters whether or not there was an inquiry, so check the deadline calculator as soon as you can.
If there was no domestic inquiry before you were dismissed and you want to challenge it, an independent employment lawyer can review the evidence you hold. They can act if the claim is worth pursuing.
For people seeking legal representation. For general information, please use our guides and tools.
First contact: general facts only, such as date, location, employment status and a short summary. Keep documents private until an identified independent lawyer contacts you and specifically requests them.
Common questions
What did the Supreme Court decide here?
An irregularity in, or the total absence of, a domestic inquiry is not fatal to the employer. The employer may still justify the dismissal before the Industrial Court by proving the misconduct at that later hearing.
Does this weaken a worker's position?
It means a missing inquiry alone does not decide your case, but the employer still carries the burden of proving just cause at the Industrial Court. That burden does not shift to you.
What is the strongest evidence to gather if there was no inquiry?
Anything that speaks to what actually happened, such as messages, witness accounts or records from around the time of the alleged misconduct, tends to matter more than the absence of the inquiry itself.
Sources
- An irregularity in, or the absence of, a domestic inquiry is not fatal to the employer, who may still justify the dismissal before the Industrial Court by proving the misconduct there. Mah Weng Kwai & Associates
- The burden of proof lies on the employer to show that a dismissal was for just cause and excuse. Mah Weng Kwai & Associates
Keep reading
If there was no domestic inquiry before you were dismissed and you want to challenge it, an independent employment lawyer can review the evidence you hold. They can act if the claim is worth pursuing.
For people seeking legal representation. For general information, please use our guides and tools.
First contact: general facts only, such as date, location, employment status and a short summary. Keep documents private until an identified independent lawyer contacts you and specifically requests them.