Back
2024 MarsdenLR 2822
HIGH COURT MALAYA PULAU PINANG
BADAN PENGURUSAN BERSAMA GURNEY PARAGON RESIDENTIAL – Appellant
Versus
HUNZA PROPERTIES (GURNEY) SDN BHD & ORS – Respondent
[Civil Suit No: PA-22NCVC-247-12/2017]
An unsuccessful plaintiff cannot seek a stay of execution without demonstrating special circumstances related to the enforcement of the judgment.
Headnote:(A) Legal principles for a stay of execution - The applicant must demonstrate special circumstances warranting a stay, which must relate to the enforcement of the judgment. Merits of the appeal do not constitute special circumstances. Courts typically do not grant stays of monetary judgments unless justified. (Paras 6-10)
(B) Unusual application - An unsuccessful plaintiff seeking a stay of execution in a case with no counterclaim is atypical. The judgment does not impose obligations on the plaintiff, thus no enforceable terms exist. (Paras 11-13)
(C) Speculated circumstances - Concerns about voting rights of defendants do not meet the threshold for special circumstances. (Paras 14-16)
(D) Distinction between stay and injunction - The application for a stay is not equivalent to seeking an injunction to maintain the status quo. (Paras 17-18) (E) Payment of costs - The execution of a monetary judgment should not be stayed without special circumstances. (Paras 20-21)
Result: Application for a stay of execution dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for stay is unusual (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. p's claims were dismissed (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. legal principles for a stay (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. unusual for an unsuccessful plaintiff (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. concerns about voting rights (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. distinction between stay and injunction (Para 17 , 18) |
| 7. merits in an appeal (Para 19) |
| 8. payment of costs (Para 20 , 21) |
| 9. application for a stay dismissed (Para 22) |
JUDGMENT
(Application For Stay Of Execution)
Prelusion
[1] This application for a stay of execution of a judgment is unusual. It is unusual because the application for a stay of execution is made by the unsuccessful Plaintiff (P), not by the Defendants.
[2] This application for a stay is contested between P and the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Defendants (D1D2D3). In P's Re-Amended Statement Of Claim, P made a total of 33 prayers for various reliefs and remedies against D1D2D3.
[3] After the trial, out of the 33 prayers against D1D2D3-
(1) P withdrew 17 prayers;
(2) no orders were made on 4 prayers; and
(3) 12 prayers were dismissed.
[4] P lost the case. P's claims were dismissed.
[5] There was no counterclaim. D1D2D3 did not mount a counterclaim against P. There was no judgment made against P. Yet P files this application for a stay of execution of the judgment. Should P's application for a stay of execution be allowed?
Principles For A Stay Of Execution
[6] The legal principles for a stay of execution that guide and bind me in this particular application for a stay of execution include these principles. One — the applicant (here: P) must demonstrate by affidavit evidence (normally through the affidavit in support of the application) that there are special circumstances that warrant a stay — Kosma Palm Oil Mill Sdn Bhd & Ors v. Koperasi Serbausaha Makmur Bhd; , para [23]; [2003] 4 CLJ 1; [2003] 5 AMR 758 (FC).
[7] Two — the grounds, namely the asserted special circumstances, must relate to the enforcement of the judgment sought to be stayed-again Kosma Palm Oil Mill (supra)
[8] Three — usually (as it is here) the applicant seeks a stay of execution of a judgment pending the outcome of the appeal that the applicant has lodged against the judgment. But the merits of the applicant's appeal, including challenges to the correctness or validity of the judgment appealed against-do not amount to the required special circumstances that justify a stay of execution- Ming Ann Holdings Sdn Bhd v. Danaharta Urus Sdn Bhd ; ; [2002] 3 CLJ 380; [2002] 3 AMR 2867.
[9] Four — Courts will not normally grant a stay of execution of a monetary judgment; not even if the judgment is for a large sum of money — Wu Shu Chen (Sole Executrix Of The Estate Of Goh Keng How, Deceased) v. Raja Zainal Abidin Raja Hussin & Anor; [1996] 2 CLJ 353; [1995] 3 AMR 2313 (HC).
[10] Five — A stay of execution will prejudice the successful party. Courts will not deprive a successful party of the fruits of their litigation until an appeal is determined, unless the unsuccessful party can show special circumstances to justify it — Serangoon Garden Estate Ltd v. Ang Keng ; .
My Grounds For Dismissing P's Application
[11] First — as I alluded to earlier, it is unusual for an unsuccessful plaintiff, in a suit with no counterclaim by the defendants, to ask for a stay of execution of the judgment. The terms of the judgment denied P their claim. Here, P's primary claim was for the alleged arrears in maintenance and sinking fund charges that D1D2D3 allegedly did not pay P.
[12] The judgment does not order P to pay any sum of money. The judgment does not order P to perform any act or carry out an obligation.
[13] I asked P to show me — from the terms of the judgment dated 26 June 2024 — which term of the judgment is available for D1D2D3 to execute or enforce against P. P could not give me an answer. And so I find that there is no term in the judgment that can be executed or enforced against P. There exists no term in the judgment that should be stayed.
