Sessions court
The highest court on the Subordinate Court is Sessions Court. Sessions court would be president by the Sessions Court Judge that will be appointed by Yang di – Pertuan Agong on the recommendation of Chief Judge (Lee Mei Pheng, 2014). The judges of Sessions Court in Kuala Lumpur are Datuk Ahmad Kamal Arifin bin Ismail, Tun Ahmad Kamar bin Jamaludin, Tun Allaudeen bin Ismail, Tun Azman bin Ahmad, Puan Azura binti Alwi, Puan Emelia Kaswati binti Mohamad Khalid and others
The qualification of Sessions Court Judges are based on the section 60 of Subordinate Courts Act 1948 which are no person shall be appointed to be a Sessions Court Judge unless he is a member of the Judicial and Legal Service of the Federation and provided that this section shall not prevent the appointment of a person to act temporarily as a Sessions Court Judge
Any criminal of Sessions Court’s jurisdiction extends to all offences other than offences punishable with deaths based on section 63, Subordinate Court Act 1948. Based on section 64, Subordinate Courts Act 1948, Session court are having a limit on the power of Sessions Court Judge by precluding a person from imposing to the death sentence. In the Sessions court, the Sessions Court Judge just can pass any sentence including natural life sentence.
For the civil matter on Sessions Court shall have unlimited jurisdiction to try all action and match of a civil natural in respect of motor vehicle accidents, landlord and tenant and distress. Other than that, Sessions Court’s jurisdiction also to try all action and suits of a civil natural where dispute to the value cannot exceeding RM1,000,000.00 based on the section 65 of Subordinate Court Act 1948. In the Sessions Court may exercise for the jurisdiction to hear and determine the action for the recovery of immovable property and issue writs or warrants of distress for rent. For the matter of most land, enforcement of trust, accounts, most declaratory decrees except interpleader proceedings, issue or revocation of grants of representation of the estates of deceased persons or the administration or distribution of estates, legitimacy, guardianship or custody of infants, validity or dissolution of marriage need to proceed to the high court to made application.
One of the case that judge on Sessions Court is Public Prosecutor v Syed Ahmad Izzuddin Syed Abdullah. The fact of this case is Syed Ahmad Izzudin was charged with submitting a false claim for the supply and installation of carpet at Surau Al-Hijrah, worth RM6,400, which was found not carried out according to specification. The offence was committed at the Terengganu Islamic Religious and Malay Customs Council (MAIDAM) office on Dec 29, 2015. He was charged under Section 16 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act, which provides an imprisonment for up to 20 years and a fine of not less tha five times the amount of the false claim or RM10,000, whichever is higher, upon conviction. Syed Ahmad Izzudin, who had initially pleaded not guilty, was also ordered to pay legal cost of RM3,000. He failed to pay the fine and was taken to Marang Prison. The decision of this case is a former assistant engineer with the Terengganu Islamic Religious and Malay Customs Council (MAIDAM), Syed Ahmad Izzuddin Syed Abdullah, was sentenced to a month's jail and fine RM32,000 by the Sessions Court here today for submitting false claim (Bernama, 2018).
Industrial Court
Industrial Court is the one to exercise judicial or quasi functions. The top management of the Industrial Court in Kuala Lumpur which is Y.A Tuan Eddie Yeo Soon Chye (President), Encik Roslee Sabaruddin bin Abu is the registrar and Cik Rokiah binti Ali Hassan is deputy registrar. The top management of the Industrial Court in Johore, the chairman is Y.A. Puan Sumathi A/P Murugiah and assistant registrar is Cik Woo Sook Han. The top management of the Industrial Court in Penang, the chairman is Y.A. Puan Mariani binti Ghani and assistant registrar is A Thanavalli Arnasalam. The top management of the Industrial Court in Perak, the chairman is Y.A. Dato' Rasidah binti Haji Chik and assistant registrar is Encik Abdul Ghafar bin Abdul Rahman. The top management of the Industrial Court in Sabah, the chairman is Y.A. Tuan Duncan Sikodol and assistant registrar is Encik Augustine Wong Ming Kong. The top management of the Industrial Court in Sarawak, the chairman is Y.A Puan Ani ak Solep @ Julia Anne Marie Solep and assistant registrar is Sharifah Meriana Wan Mohamed
For the Industrial Court is constituted under the Industrial Relations Act 1967 to deal with the primarily with the trade disputes. The Presidents of the Industrial Court is appointed by Yang di-Pertua Agong which under Section 21(1)(a) of Industrial Relations Act 1967 and section 21(1)(b) is stated a panel of persons representing employers and a panel of persons representing workmen all of whom shall be appointed by the Minister. In the Industrial Court there have some constitution which for the purpose of dealing with the trade dispute, the court has to consist of the President and two members from the panel that selected by the President (Lee Mei Pheng, 2014). The functions of the Industrial Court are to hear and hand down decisions or awards in industrial disputes referred to it by the Minister or directly by the parties and to grant cognisance to the collective agreements which have been jointly deposited by the employers or trade union of employers and trade union of employees (INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA , 2018). In industrial court that also mention about the power of the Industrial court in the Section 29 of Industrial Relations Act 1967 which are the court may be proceed before it (a) order that any party be joined, substituted or struck off; (b) Summon before it the parties to any such proceedings and any other person who in its opinion is connected with the proceedings; (c) take evidence on oath or affirmation and compel the production before it of books, papers, documents and things; (d) hear and determine the matter before it notwithstanding the failure of any party to submit any written statement whether of case or reply to the Court within such time as may be prescribed by the President or in the absence of any party to the proceedings who has been served with a notice or summons to appear; (e) conduct its proceedings or any part thereof in private; (f) after consultation with the Minister, call in the aid of one or more experts; (fa) order a case to be struck off or reinstated; and (g) generally direct and do all such things as are necessary or expedient for the expeditious determination of the matter before it.
One of the case of industrial court is Maria Hastuti binti Bachtiar v Malaysia Airline System Berhad that Maria Hastuti binti Bachtiar will stated as “the Claimant” and Malaysia Airline System Berhad stated as “the Company”. The fact of this case is the Claimant was employment by the company on 02 November 1997 as a flight stewardess. The Claimant also a member of the National Union of Flight Attendants (NUFAM) and she participated NUFAM gathering on 27 November 2013 to sign a memorandum and submit to Minister of Human Resource (MORH) in Putrajaya. On 16 January 2014, the Claimant was receive a letter of Allegation, which said that she had misconduct inconsistent with the Company. The Claimant was replied the letter on the date of 23 January 2014 and refuted the allegation that she took medical leave on 27 November 2013 for special gathering purpose. On 14 February 2014, the Company issued a Punishment Order to the Claimant, and the Claimant appealed against the Punishment Order and the Company rejected. The issue of this case is whether the dismissal of the Claimant by the Company is with or without just cause or excuse. The decision of this case is the court found out that the Claimant was not committed any serious act or acts of misconduct that warrant such as dismissal and through some evidence the court was found out the Company failed to discharge its burden of proof it had just cause or excuse to dismiss the Claimant. The court was referring to the federal court judgment of Unilever (M) Bhd Holding Sdn Bhd v So Lai & Anor [2015] 3 CJL900 to give remedies to the Company which the Company need to paid back 24 months of loss for the employment with the total money of RM65,416.32 (RM2,725.68 × 24)to the Claimant.