Kontrak tempoh tetap tamat bukan pemecatan tak adil, kata mahkamah

The High Court of Company Law has ruled that the termination of D Elizebeth's contract with VDart Malaysia Sdn Bhd was not an unfair dismissal. VDart Malaysia Sdn Bhd is a technology consultancy firm. The case was brought by Elizebeth, a former HR manager, against the firm. The court dismissed her claim for wrongful termination.

Elizebeth joined VDart in September 2023 as an HR manager and administrator on a one-year contract, earning RM7,300 per month. Her salary was increased to RM7,500 after her role was confirmed. When her contract was nearing its end in September 2024, she requested clarification about her future with the company. VDart subsequently offered a three-month extension until December 13, 2024, which she accepted and signed.

The company refused to renew her contract after the extension period ended. Elizebeth claimed she was promised permanent employment and demanded a resignation letter reflecting her newly upgraded status. She argued that the contract terms were merely concealing the truth that she was a permanent employee, and demanded her reinstatement, salary increase, and other benefits.

However, Anthony found no evidence in Elizebeth's emails to support her claim that she had been promised permanent employment. Anthony clarified that Elizebeth's emails acknowledged her original one-year contract had ended and was subsequently extended for three months. She also received an extension of the contract even though the company refused her request for a salary increase.

"The evidence shows that her claim that she had a reasonable expectation of being employed as a permanent employee is unsubstantiated," Anthony stated in his 28-page judgment. Anthony noted VDart's status as a startup company and its project-based operations also support his ruling to treat Elizebeth as a contract worker with a fixed-term contract.

He concluded that the contract in question was a fixed-term contract, and the extension offered was the final extension before it naturally ended. "The contract that Elizebeth is claiming for a specific period is a clearly defined fixed-term contract," he concluded in his judgment. Since there was no dismissal, the issue of whether dismissal had occurred without a just cause or reason did not arise.

Therefore, the claim was dismissed. Dashprit Kaur represented Elizebeth, while Timothy Dass represented VDart.