Constructive dismissal occurs when an employer’s conduct — not the employee’s resignation — effectively ends the employment relationship. When an employer fundamentally breaches the employment contract, and the employee resigns in response to that breach, the law treats the resignation as a dismissal by the employer. This is constructive dismissal, and the employee has the same rights as if they had been directly dismissed.
Constructive dismissal claims are among the most contested employment disputes in Malaysia — and among the most difficult to succeed in. An employee who resigns and then claims constructive dismissal faces significant evidential challenges. Equally, employers defending constructive dismissal claims must demonstrate that their conduct did not repudiate the contract of employment. NZSK’s employment law team has experience on both sides.
Why Choose Us?


15+ Years
Law Experience

500+ Cases
Matter Handled

400+ Cases
Custody Secured

RM10Mil +
Hidden Assets Uncovered
What Constitutes Constructive Dismissal in Malaysia?
The test for constructive dismissal in Malaysia is whether the employer has, by its conduct, fundamentally breached a term of the employment contract — either an express term or the implied term of mutual trust and confidence — and whether the employee resigned in response to that breach within a reasonable time. Common employer conduct that gives rise to constructive dismissal claims includes:
- Unilateral changes to terms and conditions — including significant salary reductions, demotion, removal of job responsibilities, and material changes to working hours or location without agreement
- Harassment and bullying — systematic hostile conduct, humiliation, or victimisation by management that destroys the implied term of mutual trust and confidence
- Unfounded disciplinary action — using the disciplinary process as a weapon — targeting an employee with baseless allegations of misconduct to force their departure
- Exclusion from management and role — for senior employees and director-employees, being locked out of systems, denied information, or effectively sidelined from their management role
- Reduction in status or authority — transferring an employee to a lesser role, removing direct reports, or materially diminishing their standing within the organisation
The Key Risks for Employees Claiming Constructive Dismissal
The single most common mistake employees make in constructive dismissal situations is resigning voluntarily without establishing the legal basis first. To succeed in a constructive dismissal claim, the employee must demonstrate:
- A fundamental breach of contract by the employer — not merely an inconvenient or unfair change — a genuine repudiation of the essential terms of the employment relationship
- Resignation in response to the breach — the resignation must be causally connected to the employer’s conduct — resigning for unrelated reasons, or continuing to work for a prolonged period after the breach, can destroy the claim
- Acting within a reasonable time — accepting the breach by continuing to work too long after the repudiatory conduct may be treated as affirmation of the contract, waiving the right to claim constructive dismissal
We advise employees on whether the facts support a viable constructive dismissal claim — and critically, on when and how to resign to preserve the legal basis for the claim — before any resignation letter is submitted.
Employer Defence to Constructive Dismissal Claims
NZSK acts for employers defending constructive dismissal claims as well as for employees bringing them. A successful employer defence typically involves demonstrating that the business changes complained of were legitimate exercises of managerial prerogative, that any change to the employee’s role or terms was within the scope of the employment contract, and that there was no bad faith or ulterior motive.
Constructive Dismissal — Our Results
| EMPLOYER WIN
2025 |
Bina Puri Sdn Bhd
Successfully defended Bina Puri in a High Court judicial review arising from a constructive dismissal claim. The claimant alleged that additional duties assigned to her amounted to a fundamental breach of contract. The High Court dismissed the judicial review, ruling that the additional duties were within the claimant’s job scope and that there was no bad faith by the employer. Hasnah Hashim v. Bina Puri Sdn Bhd & Anor [2025] 3 MELR 660 — Handled by Lawyer Khoo |
Claim Dismissed |
Frequently Asked Questions
Speak to a Employment Lawyer Now!
- (+60)16-557 4789 | (+60)3-8060 0267
- [email protected]
Consultation by appointment — Mont Kiara, Kuala Lumpur & Puchong, Selangor
Related Topics
Employment Contracts
Misconduct & Domestic
Industrial Court
Retrenchment & Redundancy
