Proven Misconduct Does Not End The Inquiry
The court asks two separate questions before a misconduct dismissal is upheld.
What The Case Decided
Milan Auto Sdn Bhd v Wong Seh Yen addresses how a misconduct dismissal is actually tested.
The Federal Court decided it in 1995, reported at [1995] 4 CLJ 449.
The court held that the Industrial Court has a twofold function.
It first decides whether the alleged misconduct was established on the evidence.
It then decides whether that proven misconduct was serious enough to be just cause for dismissal 1.
What The Principle Means Plainly
These are two separate questions, not one.
An employer proving that something happened does not automatically win the case.
The court must still weigh whether dismissal was a fair and proportionate response.
A minor lapse in an otherwise clean record can still count as misconduct.
Yet it can still be judged too small to justify losing your job.
What It Means For A Worker
If you are facing a misconduct dismissal, do not assume the case is over.
That holds even where the underlying incident is hard to dispute.
The proportionality of the penalty is a separate battleground.
Your length of service and prior record can matter here.
Gathering evidence of your work history strengthens this second part of the argument.
Where This Fits In A Claim
This twofold test sits alongside the reason based test from Goon Kwee Phoy v J & P Coats.
Both are argued together within a broader unfair dismissal claim at the Industrial Court.
The outcome always depends on your specific facts, with no result promised.
Since the sixty day window applies from your dismissal date, check the deadline calculator early.
Talking through whether the penalty matched the incident is a conversation worth having with an employment lawyer before you assume the case is closed.
Common questions
What did the Federal Court decide in Milan Auto?
The Industrial Court has a twofold function in a misconduct case. It first decides whether the misconduct actually happened on the evidence, then separately decides whether that misconduct was serious enough to justify dismissal.
Does proof of misconduct mean the dismissal was automatically fair?
No, proof of misconduct is only the first step. The court still has to weigh whether dismissal, as opposed to a warning or a lesser penalty, was a proportionate response to what actually happened.
Why does this distinction matter for a worker?
It means even if you admit or cannot dispute the underlying incident, you can still argue the penalty of dismissal was too severe. That argument is separate from disputing the facts themselves.
Sources
- The Industrial Court has a twofold function: first to decide whether the misconduct was established, then to decide whether it was serious enough to be just cause or excuse for dismissal. Mah Weng Kwai & Associates
Keep reading
Talking through whether the penalty matched the incident is a conversation worth having with an employment lawyer before you assume the case is closed.