top of page
E2 Logo Shadows
Discover how Malaysia’s Industrial Court ruled in Award No. 460 of 2026, affirming that dismissal without a domestic inquiry can be justified in cases of serious misconduct. Learn key takeaways on trust positions, forensic evidence, and admissible behavioral patterns.
Case Summary

Head of School Dismissed for Assaulting a Student & Sending Inappropriate Messages to a Minor

Posted on April 14, 2026 by Victor Gan

"Can an employer dismiss an employee without a domestic inquiry? This case examines the position adopted by the Industrial Court on serious misconduct committed by a person in a position of trust. "

In a recent award by the Industrial Court, (Award No. 460 of 2026), the employee (Claimant) was employed as a Head of School in an international secondary school.


The Company upon discovering acts of misconduct, issued a show cause containing several charges. The employee denied all the allegations. The Company proceeded to terminate his employment without a domestic inquiry.

The Claimant was charged with the following acts of misconduct:


  1. Physically assaulting a student

What happened?

At a sports tournament, the Claimant allegedly slapped a Year 8 student 4 to 5 times on his cheeks in an angry manner after the team conceded goals.

Industrial Court decision

At the Industrial Court, the ‘slap’ was persuaded to be read in the context of a competitive environment and the fact the Claimant was a Team Captain. At Court, witnesses who demonstrated the action showed the Claimant using both hands simultaneously on the cheeks as opposed to a single handed strike. 


The Industrial Court concluded that the act was more consistent with a motivational action and is not regarded as an act of violence.

  1. Assaulting and threatening a student

What happened?

The Claimant was informed that another Year 8 student labelled him as a ‘paedophile’, He pulled this student out from class, took him to a secluded hallway, swore at him, pushed him against the wall and slapped him. He also threatened to beat him up if he ever repeated the comment.

Industrial Court decision

The Claimant was found guilty on this charge based on:


  • The Claimant did not deny pulling the employee out from the classroom. 


  • There were witnesses who heard shouting and witnessed the Claimant saying ‘If you ever do it again, I will beat the shit out of you’.


  • The Claimant failed to report the matter to the Principal and decided to take matters into his own hands. This is not acceptable in a position of seniority.

  1. Inappropriate messages to a minor


What happened?

Forensic examination of the Claimant’s laptop found inappropriate WhatsApp messages with a female Year 11 student. The investigation revealed messages such as “I have only love for you”, “You look beautiful”, “Ur so cute”, “Ur voice is too pretty”, amongst others. The student’s contact was also saved with a love emoji.

Industrial Court decision

The Industrial Court found that the messages were sent late at night with no academic or emergency purpose. 


This particular student was also the only one having intimate messages, creating an obvious conflict. 


Witness no. 4 established a potential pattern. In her case, the similar emotional intimacy led to sexual relationship after she left the School. 


The Court found that the messages to the student were not innocent. 


Claimant found guilty.

The decision to terminate the Claimant was upheld by the Industrial Court even though no domestic inquiry was conducted and even though Charge 1 was not proven. With regards to the remaining charges, the Court found that the Claimant’s acts were sufficiently serious to justify dismissal.

Key Takeaways


  1. A domestic inquiry is not mandatory. It’s good practice if you’re able to do so because a domestic inquiry will inevitably provide you with a better perspective of the case. If you can’t, it’s not fatal to your case. Your case will have to be proven at the Industrial Court instead. 


  1. Patterns are admissible in Court: Note that in this case, a ‘pattern’ of behavior is admitted as evidence even though the said conduct was not formally proven. 


  1. Forensics played a big part: The laptop was central in proving Charge 3. Employers should take note of the do’s and don’ts from an IT perspective in order to safeguard valuable information which may help the case.

Exit Package or Legal Trap: How your seemingly safe MSS could backfire - By Richard Wee A signed MSS is not an absolute shield. Recent case awards have emphasised on the importance of the ‘leading up’ instead of the document itself. This hypothetical session allows participants to understand the build-up of a MSS from multiple perspectives.



Ask Our HR Consultants
Share Your ThoughtsBe the first to write a comment.
Background.png

Upcoming Events

Insightful. Impactful. Unmissable.

Zero tolerance socmed-02.jpg
Event Page Design.png

ZERO TOLERANCE,

FULL COMPLIANCE:

HR’s Guide to Corruption, Sexual Harassment & Data Protection

Get the complete HR guide to navigating anti-corruption, sexual harassment, and data protection laws.
Led by Dzulfadhli Lamin, this practical 2-day course breaks down the legal essentials every HR leader must know for 2026 — from policy to protection, reporting to recovery.

Sheraton Petaling Jaya Hotel | April 13 - 14, 2026 | 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM

Sign-up Now
bottom of page