Case:

Brief Facts:

• Ahmad Suhairi Mat Ali [Suhairi], who is the Claimant in this case was an employee of CIMB Bank [CIMB] the Appellant.
  
  
• Suhairi held the position of Area Commercial Manager (ACM) for the bank’s operations in Kedah and Perlis in the year 2012.
  
  
• On 8^th of May 2012, the Suhairi was re-designated as Team Leader of the Special Acquisition Team (SAT) and based in Penang.
  
  
• Prior to being re-designated, CIMB had advised Suhairi regarding his poor performance and that he would not be receiving a bonus for 2011.
  
  
• He was also informed that his performance would be monitored and action would be taken if Suhairi did not show significant improvement.
  
  
• The new position Suhairi was re-designated to required him to complete tasks his subordinates were expected to do when he held the position of ACM prior to the re-designation.
  
  
• Suhairi challenged the decision of the transfer by claiming that he had been victimised and the transfer would amount to a demotion.
  
  
• Despite sending several emails challenging the decisions of CIMB, there was no contemporaneous reply from CIMB.
  
  
• On 18^th of July 2012, Suhairi then walked out from his place of employment after one month and eighteen days after commencing his new role as a SAT.
  
  
• He claimed constructive dismissal and took legal action against CIMB.

THE DECISION OF INDUSTRIAL COURT

• The Industrial Court was of the opinion that the claim for constructive dismissal was without just cause or excuse and proceeded to dismiss the claim.
  
  
• Suhairi then challenged the decision at the High Court.

THE DECISION OF HIGH COURT

• The High Court set aside the decision of the Industrial Court and ruled that Suhairi was indeed constructively dismissed.
  
  
• Suhairi was granted the sum of RM442,117.20 with costs of RM10,000.00.
  
  
• CIMB then appealed to the Court of Appeal.

THE DECISION OF COURT OF APPEAL – APPEAL DISMISSED!

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision made by the High Court and dismissed the appeal of CIMB while granting costs.
  
  
• The Court held that CIMB was in fundamental breach of their employment contract with Suhairi and was held liable for constructively dismissing the Suhairi.
  
  
• The Court of Appeal agreed based on the evidence that re-designating Suhairi to the position of the SAT leader was indeed a demotion as the position would demand for Suhairi to engage in tasks which he had perform before becoming the ACM.
  
  
• The position was clearly inferior and called for Suhairi to work alone without any of the staff reporting to him.
  
  
• The Court also asserted that the failure of CIMB to respond to Suhairi’s emails was a failure on CIMB’s part to manage Suhairi’s pleas for intervention and was a fundamental breach of the implied term that CIMB would not do anything to destroy the mutual trust and confidence between employer/employee relationships.