A party seeking a stay of proceedings must provide special circumstances; otherwise, the court favors expeditious resolution of cases.

[5] The Plaintiff filed an application for summary judgment against the Defendants which was allowed by this Court (Nallini Pathmanathan J, reported in Universal Trustee (Malaysia) Berhad v. Lambang Pertama Sdn Bhd & Anor; on 25 March 2014 (Summary Judgment). Nallini Pathmanathan J however ordered a stay of execution of the Summary Judgment pending the disposal of the Counterclaim (Stay of Summary Judgment).

[6] The Plaintiff filed its application to strike out the Counterclaim (Plaintiff's Striking Out Application) on 10 April 2014.

[7] On 17 April 2014 the Defendants appealed to the Court of Appeal against the Summary Judgment (Defendants' Appeal).

[8] The hearing of the Plaintiff's Striking Out Application was scheduled to be heard on 17 June 2014. However, on 10 June 2014, the Defendants filed this application to stay the hearing of the Plaintiff's Striking Out Application pending disposal of the Defendants' Appeal (Defendants' Stay Application).

B. Which Application To Be Heard First

[9] On 4 July 2014, the Plaintiff's Striking Out Application and the Defendants' Stay Application came before me.

[10] I decided to hear the Defendants' Stay Application before disposing of the Plaintiff's Striking Out Application. This is because if I hear the Plaintiff's Striking Out Application first, this will render redundant the Defendants' Stay Application. The Plaintiff's learned counsel, Ms. Kong Chia Yee, to her credit, did not object to the disposal of the Defendants' Stay Application before hearing the Plaintiff's Striking Out Application.

C. Court's Jurisdiction To Stay Proceedings

[11] Section 73 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (CJA) provides as follows:

"An appeal shall not operate as a stay of execution or of proceedings under the decision appealed from unless the Court below or the Court of Appeal so orders and no intermediate act or proceeding shall be invalidated except so far as the Court of Appeal may direct".

(emphasis added).

[12]r 13 of the Rules of the of Appeal 1994 states:-

"An appeal shall not operate as a stay of execution or of proceedings under the decision appealed from unless the High Court or the Court so orders and no intermediate act or proceeding shall be invalidated except so far as the Court may direct."

(emphasis added).

[13] The above 2 statutory provisions (2 Statutory Provisions), in my view, provide the statutory jurisdiction for the High Court and Court of Appeal to stay:-

(a) Execution of any order or judgment; and

(b) Proceedings

- Pending disposal of an appeal to the Court of Appeal.

[14] The wording of the 2 Statutory Provisions indicate that the general rule is that an appeal to the Court of Appeal does not stay:-

(a) Execution of an order or judgment which is the subject matter of the appeal; and

(b) Proceedings in the High Court.

[15] In view of the wording of the 2 Statutory Provisions, stay of execution and stay of proceedings pending appeal to Court of Appeal should be the exception and not the norm. If otherwise, the opening words in the 2 Statutory Provisions (appeal shall not operate as a stay of execution or of proceedings) will be undermined, if not rendered redundant.

[16] As there are clear statutory provisions conferring an exceptional jurisdiction on the High Court and Court of Appeal to stay execution and to stay proceedings pending appeal to the Court of Appeal, there is no need to resort to the Court's inherent jurisdiction - Federal Court's judgment in In Majlis Agama Islam Selangor v. Bong Boon Chuen , 2009 MarsdenLR 2301 , at 320.

[17] Section 49(3) of the then named Supreme Court Act 1