Philip Phang Kin Ming & Anor v M Jets International Sdn Bhd

Appellant(s):

• Philip Phang Kin Ming
• Gunasekar A/L Mariappan

Respondent(s): M Jets International Sdn Bhd

• YA Dato' Che Mohd Ruzima Bin Ghazali
• YA Dato' Paduka Azman Bin Abdullah
• YA Datin Paduka Evrol Mariette Peters

• The appellants, who served as senior executives for the respondent, were suspended pending a misconduct inquiry with a contractual promise of full salary, which the respondent subsequently failed to pay for the duration of the suspension.
• The appellants lodged a claim for unpaid wages at the Labour Office under section 69 of the Employment Act 1955, and following their subsequent termination, filed representations for reinstatement due to unfair dismissal at the Industrial Court.
• Although the Labour Office initially ordered the respondent to pay the outstanding wages, the High Court set aside the order, ruling that the Labour Office’s jurisdiction was ousted by the pending Industrial Court proceedings.

• Whether section 69A of the Employment Act 1955 operates as an absolute jurisdictional bar to the Director General of Labour’s power to inquire into wage claims when a related dispute is pending before the Industrial Court.
• Whether the Labour Office retains jurisdiction over a claim for accrued debt (unpaid wages) when the underlying facts, such as the validity of salary increases and alleged misconduct, overlap with issues to be determined in an unfair dismissal claim.
• The proper application of the principle of preventing duplicity of proceedings and the risk of conflicting decisions between two statutory adjudicatory bodies.

• The Court unanimously dismissed the appeal, holding that section 69A of the Employment Act 1955 acts as a clear statutory ouster of the Labour Office’s jurisdiction once a matter is referred to or pending before the Industrial Court.
• The Court ruled that because the determination of the wage claim was inextricably linked to issues before the Industrial Court—including the validity of the appellants' salaries and the lawfulness of their suspension—parallel adjudication would undermine the coherence of the dispute resolution process.
• The Court affirmed that the Industrial Court is the more appropriate and comprehensive forum for such disputes, as it possesses the necessary remedial powers to award back wages and compensation while resolving all interconnected factual and legal issues.