industrial court malaysia - Malaysian Legal and Tax Information Centre

In Robert John Reeves v Southern Bank Bank Berhad [2010 2 LNS 1608]
the Industrial Court held that “the court states that it does not think that it is
proper that the Claimant should be allowed his prayer for all other contractual
benefits that was accorded to him in the form of housing allowances,
performance based rewards and other benefits as claimed pursuant to Clause
28 of his statement of case'.
Issue Of Bonus
a) In the case of UMW Toyota (M) Sdn. Bhd. v. Chow Weng Thiem [1996]
5 MLJ 678, the High Court held as follows:
“A bonus is a gift or gratuity as a gesture of goodwill, and not
enforceable, or it may be something which an employee is entitled to on
the happening of a condition precedent and is enforceable when the
condition is fulfilled. But in both cases it is something in addition to or in
excess of that which is ordinarily received. Since bonus was a form of
gratuitous payment of a discretionary nature, the respondent was not
entitled to it as of right.”
b) In the Industrial Court's case of Felda Palm Industries Sdn. Bhd. v.
Mansor Pratiman [2006] 2 LNS 0948, the court followed and affirmed the
above case of UMW Toyota (M) Sdn. Bhd.:
'In the case of UMW Toyota (M) Sdn. Bhd. v. Chow Weng Thiem
(1996) 5 MLJ 678. His Lordship Abdul Malik J. said, “In my judgment
bonus was a form of gratuitous payment of a discretionary nature, the
respondent was not entitled to it as of right”. This Court agrees with the
25