What Clients Say About Their Engagements

Challenge

A client in financial services had been dismissed following a domestic inquiry process where the procedures set out in the company handbook had not been fully followed. The dismissal letter did not state the reasons with the specificity the Industrial Court expects. The client had 38 days remaining on the Section 20 deadline when they made contact.

Approach

Documents were gathered and reviewed within the first week. A written merits opinion was provided identifying the procedural deficiencies in the domestic inquiry and the strength of the position at conciliation. The client decided to file and proceed to conciliation rather than accept the initial separation offer. A revised offer was presented during conciliation discussions.

Outcome

Settlement agreed at conciliation stage, significantly above the initial offer. The matter concluded within four months of the first enquiry, without referral to the Industrial Court. The client received a full written brief on the terms before signing, and the settlement agreement was reviewed by the assigned counsel on the day of execution.

Challenge

A Kuala Lumpur technology company with around 80 staff had not updated its employment documentation since 2020. Following the Employment Act amendments effective January 2023, several contract provisions — including those relating to overtime, paternity leave, and flexible work arrangements — required revision. The HR team was uncertain of the scope of changes required.

Approach

The engagement began with a full document audit — employment contracts, offer letter templates, and the employee handbook. A written gap analysis memo was produced identifying non-compliant provisions and the required amendments. Revised templates were drafted and the handbook updated. A quarterly retainer was subsequently put in place to manage ongoing compliance.

Outcome

All employment documentation brought into compliance within six weeks. The HR team now receives quarterly written updates on relevant legal developments and has access to ad hoc written memos on specific questions as they arise. Two subsequent retrenchment-planning questions were managed within the retainer scope without additional charge.

Challenge

A regional director with equity compensation linked to a vesting schedule was leaving a multinational employer. The company's initial separation offer included a broadly worded 24-month non-solicitation clause covering both clients and former colleagues, and a non-compete provision that effectively restricted the executive from working in their field anywhere in Southeast Asia. Garden leave was also proposed for the full notice period.

Approach

A written position paper was prepared assessing the equity entitlement position under the plan rules, the enforceability of each restrictive covenant under Malaysian law, and the reasonable scope for negotiation on the garden leave period. Revised terms were proposed in writing to the company's legal counsel with a detailed rationale for each amendment. Two rounds of written exchange followed.

Outcome

Garden leave reduced from the full notice period to six weeks. Non-compete geographical scope narrowed to Malaysia only, with duration reduced to twelve months. Non-solicitation of clients limited to direct client contacts held in the 12 months prior to departure. Equity entitlement fully preserved under the plan rules as argued. Final settlement agreement drafted and reviewed by the assigned lead partner before execution.