Insights into ‘Strategic Litigation’ for Advancing the Rights of Gig Workers in Malaysia

DOI

10.2991/978-94-6239-785-9_15How to use a DOI?

Keywords

Employment law; Collective mobilisation; Gig workers’ rights; Strategic litigation

Abstract

In industrial relations, ‘strategic litigation’ is used by trade unions and activists to advance workers’ rights, both to pressure stakeholders and to raise public awareness. Malaysia’s legal context, however, has meant relatively limited attention to ‘strategic litigation’ for gig workers. By contrast, the United Kingdom (the UK) has seen more frequent use by independent unions. Unions such as the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain and the GMB have been recognised for supporting and funding the landmark case of Uber BV v Aslam [2021] UKSC 5. Motivated by the impact of these movements, this study aims to examine the potential and limitations of ‘strategic litigation’ in addressing gig workers’ protection issues in Malaysia, drawing on the UK experiences and to explore how ‘strategic litigation’ can be effectively employed, alongside other solutions, to tackle challenges associated with gig work. Methodologically, this socio-legal study uses qualitative interviews and document review, with critical content analysis of interview data and legal and non-legal sources. Findings indicate that ‘strategic litigation’ offers a targeted yet conditional pathway to strengthen protections for Malaysian gig workers. The UK experience shows that well-chosen test cases can reframe status determinations and procedural safeguards. Nevertheless, local impact is moderated by independent-contractor classification, low association density, resource constraints, and uneven enforcement. Accordingly, litigation should be embedded within a broader strategy aligned with association-led mobilisation, regulatory engagement, and implementation of the Gig Workers’ Bill, emphasising due process in account termination, transparency in pay-setting, and access to SOCSO/EPF. When systematically organised and evidence-based, such cases can translate courtroom outcomes into durable institutional practice. The Bill’s tribunal access and appeal mechanisms can operationalise these aims, while iterative litigation helps counter adaptive platform practices. Comparative lessons also caution that court judgments alone rarely secure change unless paired with organising and monitoring to ensure compliance.

Copyright

© 2026 The Author(s)

Open Access

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

Download article (PDF)

TY  - CONF
AU  - Nazruzila Razniza Mohd Nadzri
AU  - Nurhidayah Abdullah
AU  - Kamal Halili Hassan
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/07
TI  - Insights into ‘Strategic Litigation’ for Advancing the Rights of Gig Workers in Malaysia
BT  - Proceedings of the UUM 13th International Legal Conference 2025 (UUMILC 2025)
PB  - Atlantis Press
SP  - 210
EP  - 225
SN  - 2667-128X
UR  - https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6239-785-9_15
DO  - 10.2991/978-94-6239-785-9_15
ID  - Nadzri2026
ER  -