Contempt in Industrial Court?

Generally, when a litigant interferes with the due administration of justice in a civil/criminal court, he/she is exposed to the possibility of committal proceedings which in turn has penal consequences such as a fine and worst still imprisonment. It is however uncommon (and unheard of) for Claimants in the Industrial Court to be charged with contempt even though Section 58 of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (“IRA”) has provisions for contempt of Court.

This may now have to change in light of the flagrant conduct of the Claimant in the Industrial Court Case No. 4/4-443/23 Ching Suet Yeen v JWC Venture Sdn Bhd where the Claimant can be described as thumbing its nose at the Industrial Courts.

In this case, the Chairman referred to the Claimant as a “Serial Claimant” because she was notorious for making representations against 18 different Employers/Companies for purported unfair dismissal, out of which 8 was referred to the Industrial Court. The Court found that the Claimant conducted various “cunning, highly dishonest manoeuvres to mislead the Court” as seen below:

1.            The Claimant misled the Court that she was dismissed by the Company when in actual fact, it was the Claimant whom stopped working for the Company;

2.            Although there was no dismissal per se, she falsely created two different dismissal letters (both dated the same day) purportedly issued by the Company, wherein the 2nd letter suspiciously provides that the Company is willing to pay her 2 months compensation;

3.            The coup de grace is when the Claimant created false court documents to support her argument that costs was awarded to her by virtue of Allocatur Certificates purportedly issued by various chairmen of the Industrial Court of Malaysia. These certificates are clearly false because there are no provisions for the issuance of allocator fees under the legislation and rules related to the Industrial Court.

Thus, it is undeniable that the Claimant abused the Court’s process.

What makes it worse is that this is not the first time this Claimant was found to be misleading in the Industrial Court. Other Industrial Court Chairmans even handed down Awards which was strongly worded against her contemptuous acts of basking falsehood and misrepresentations and had also ordered cost against this Claimant (which was unprecedented) in the hope that this Claimant will not repeat the same acts.

This however has not deterred the Claimant as it is apparent from this Award. Instead, after misleading the Industrial Court, the Claimant walks away with no repercussions or punishments save for a slap on the wrist by virtue of the strong disdain indicted by the Industrial Court in its Award.

With that in mind, is it time for the threat of contempt to be considered seriously and enforced in the Industrial Court? This is surely something to think about.

See grounds of judgment:

https://tinyurl.com/33z2pwvu