Case to Download

R. Jesudaa Raghavan v St. Microelectronics Sdn Bhd [2013] 1 MELRU 11,

the Courts have laid down several factors to consider on in determining whether a comment can be
deemed as sexual harassment:

Whether the recipient gave a negative reaction to the comment or action;

The working environment where it was conveyed;
Whether the act or comment is seen to have any sexual connotation or different meaning (double
entendre);
The relationship between the recipient and the perpetrator.

Yahya Mat Wazir v Petroliam Nasional Berhad [2015] 2 MELR 614

the Claimant was held to have committed sexual harassment by text messages and making
inappropriate statements to colleagues such as I dont plan to marry another one but you can never
know nafsu lelaki satu, nafsu perempuan banyak [] you know la nafsu lelaki itu apa?. The
Court held that the Claimants comments were sexual in nature and created a hostile working
environment which the victim had to tolerate in order to continue working.

Kamarul Zaman Bin Mamat v Nippon Wiper Blade (M) Sdn Bhd [2013] MELRU 1,
the Claimant was dismissed as he had given remarks of a sexual nature to a colleague. He
said Marilah duduk sini (Come sit here) with the his hands on his thighs, and ogled his colleague
with suggestive overtones denoting persistent flirting.

Berjaya Redang Beach Resort Sdn Bhd v R. Samikannoo Rajoo [2014] 1 MELR 584,
the act of unzipping ones trousers in front of a female colleague and sticking out his tongue in a
lewd suggestive manner were classified as sexual harassment.

Fuchs Petrolube (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd v Chan Puck Lin @ Chan Pak Nean [2003] 3 ILR 845

persistent phone calls calling one for lunch invitations and even sending a card with improper words
were held to have been seen as sexual harassment.