The hearing to decide on whether to strike out or stay the ex-parte injunction granted to National Union of Bank Employees (NUBE) general secretary J Solomon last November will continue on March 5 and 6.

Justice Abdul Aziz Muhammad today heard in chambers Solomons injunction to restrain the union from removing him as the general secretary.

It was heard together with the other six defendants application seeking to have Solomons suit summarily thrown out.

The six are NUBE president Johar Sulaiman, his deputy Muhammad Fauzi Shamsuddin, vice-president Toh Seng Hock, general treasurer Mohd Noor Basir, exco members A Prathiba Raj and the union itself as a registered trade union.

In his affidavit dated Nov 16 last year, Solomon stated that his dismissal on Oct 30 the same year was ultra vires the NUBE constitution, in breach of the fundamental rules of natural justice, illegal, and null and void.

He believes that his removal from office without any notice was tainted with ill-intentions based on the absence of an agenda for any intended vote of no confidence during the Oct 30 exco meeting, the failure to issue any show-cause or specific charge and the failure to hear his defence.

He also believes that the NUBE constitutions provision for arbitration does not bar him from seeking a legal remedy and an interim relief in court.

On Oct 31, a circular was sent out to all NUBE members announcing the change in leadership after the national exco passed a vote of no-confidence against Solomon and that Mohd Noor, the general treasurer at that time, will replace him as general secretary.

Toh was named as the general treasurer in the same circular carrying the new list of principal office bearers.

No locus standi

Mohd Noor, in his affidavit dated Nov 27 last year, said the injunction against the six defendants was outside the courts jurisdiction and that Solomon had no locus standi .

He stated that Solomons right to challenge the excos decision lay in arbitration under Rule 26 of the NUBE constitution read together with Section 44 of the Trade Unions Act 1955 and/or Order 6.5 of the Triennial Delegates Conference.

The plaintiff (Solomon) has no cause of action whatsoever in court. Any dispute by him must be referred to arbitration because the court has no jurisdiction over such matters.

I deny that the excos decision on Oct 30, 2001, was a fraud or a colourable exercise. I believe that the move was in accordance with rules and is valid, he said in the affidavit.

He also disputed Solomons claim of having begun investigations into the RM10 million losses incurred in 1996 involving a contra share deal with BBMB Securities Sdn Bhd.

Mohd Noor said Solomon never investigated losses incurred in share trading, which is a matter for the police to investigate since a report had already been lodged at that time.

As far as I know, the exco or the working committee had never appointed or directed the plaintiff (Solomon) to investigate [the matter].

Cyrus V Das and D Kalaimani are representing Solomon and the NUBE respectively.

Solomon is also suing Johar and Mohd Noor for defamation over reports of his sacking. The suits were filed at the Kuala Lumpur High Court registry on Jan 8 and 9 respectively.