Ex-Grab driver fails in legal bid to refer dismissal case to Industrial Court

 

A laid-off Grab driver did not succeed in her legal action to uphold her right for her case of alleged unfair dismissal be referred to the Industrial Court.

The High Court in Kuala Lumpur today dismissed the judicial review application by single mother-of-one Loh Guet Ching.

The 41-year-old was challenging the legality of the Human Resources Minister’s decision to refuse to refer her case of alleged unfair dismissal to the Industrial Court.

Her judicial review listed the minister (who is not named), the Industrial Relations Department director-general (who is not named), and Myteksi Sdn Bhd (the operator of Grab service in Malaysia), as the first, second and third respondents respectively.

According to online judiciary portal efs.kehakiman.gov.my, judge Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid delivered his decision to the parties via email earlier today.

The official website stated that Loh’s judicial review application was dismissed, and that she was ordered to pay global costs of RM3,000 to the minister and Industrial Relations Department director-general.

The portal also stated that she was ordered to bear costs of RM3,000 to Myteksi.

Malaysiakini is seeking a response from her counsel Ng Kian Nam regarding the outcome of the matter.

Her legal team is set to hold an online press conference via zoom over the court verdict at 9.45am tomorrow.

According to cause papers, Loh was allegedly unfairly laid off by Myteksi on Nov 5, 2019, after more than three years' service with the e-hailing company, allegedly with no prior notice and not given the right to be heard, among others.

She claimed that Myteksi ignored a letter sent by her legal team on Dec 12 that same year, seeking a reason and explanation for her dismissal as well as an appeal to be restored to her work.

Following financial pressure due to loss of means to earn a living and the need to look after her son, she had then filed a representation against the company at the Industrial Relations Department at Federal Territory, Kuala Lumpur, on March 3 last year.

'Case involves public interest'

Following breakdown of mediation between Loh and Myteksi, her legal team then wrote to the Industrial Relations Department on April 15 last year, seeking for her case to be referred to the Industrial Court.

However, through a letter from the second respondent on July 10 last year, she was informed that the minister had decided that it was not appropriate for her dismissal case to be referred to the Industrial Court.

Loh also claimed that the first and second respondents did not reply to her letter seeking to appeal against the minister’s decision.

She had then filed her judicial review action at the High Court in Kuala Lumpur on Oct 10, last year.

The court granted her leave to proceed with the legal action in November, following no objections raised by the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC). The AGC represents the minister and the Industrial Relations Department director-general.

Loh contended that she has the same fundamental right to equality under the law, per Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, in order to bring her representation to the Industrial Court to achieve justice and legal protection.

“As an e-hailing driver who was laid off without reasonable cause and excuse by the third respondent, the Industrial Court is the judicial body with exclusive jurisdiction to hear my case.

“This case also involves public interest for many other e-hailing drivers who had been for so long oppressed by the third respondent, chiefly by similar work termination that is unfair and prejudicial to the fundamental rights and dignity of e-hailing drivers in Malaysia,” she contended.

She claimed that her legal team and several NGOs had previously tried to help hundreds of other laid-off e-hailing drivers to be restored to their previous work, but that Myteksi allegedly did not entertain or take seriously most of these cases. - Mkini