Court emphasized high threshold for stay applications; burden on opposing parties to show exceptional circumstances.

[1] The appellant by a notice of motion (encl 3) seeks to stay a civil suit pending the disposal of a winding up petition which was subsequently filed after the civil suit.

[2] It must be noted that the winding up petition was filed by Dato' Sri Ong, a person who was a contributory of the appellant in the civil suit. We were informed that the civil suit was going to be tried by the High Court the following day. A stay was applied in the High Court and was not granted. Following the refusal of the stay, the applicant has filed a notice of appeal and seeks this interim stay. The respondents alleged that this application was applied to stall the civil suit. The application was also filed by certificate of urgency and in consequence the 2nd and 3rd respondents were not able to file their reply to the affidavit. However, the 1st respondent has filed a reply. We have directed all parties to ensure their written submissions are filed or given to the Court.

[3] The application for stay is made under s 44 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (CJA 1964) as well as the inherent jurisdiction of the Court. The prayer inter alia reads as follows:

"1. an interim order to stay any and all proceedings in the Kuala Lumpur High Court Civil Suit No: WA-22NCC-26-01/2018 (including but not limited to the 1st Respondent's claim and the 3rd Respondent's counterclaim against the Applicant) ("the Civil Suit") pending the disposal of the Applicant's Appeal vide Notice of Appeal dated 20 July 2018."

[4] The grounds in support of the application read as follows:

"1. The Applicant applied to stay the proceedings at the Kuala Lumpur High Court Civil Suit No.: WA-22NCC-26-01/2018 ("Civil Suit Court") pending the disposal of the Winding-Up Petition filed against the Applicant in Kuala Lumpur High Court Winding-Up Petition No.: WA-28NCC-685-07/2018 ("Winding-Up Petition").

2. The appeal herein is against the decision of the Civil Suit Court in dismissing the Applicant's Application to stay the proceedings in the Civil Suit Court, pending the disposal of the Winding-Up Petition ("the Stay Appeal").

3. In the event the trial of the Civil Suit, which is fixed on 23 July 2018 to 25 July 2018 were to proceed before the Stay Appeal is heard and disposed off, the Stay Appeal will be rendered nugatory.

4. In the circumstances, there is a need to preserve the status quo of the proceedings in the Civil Suit Court pending the hearing and determination of the Stay Appeal.

5. In the premises, there are special circumstances that warrant an interim stay of the proceedings in the Civil Suit Court pending the disposal of the Stay Appeal.

6. The balance of convenience and/or justice favours the grant of the interim stay sought for herein."

[5] The chronology of events has been summarised in the 2nd respondents submission and inter alia read as follows:

"(2) On 19 January 2018, The 1st Respondent filed the High Court Suit against the Appellant, 2nd and 3rd Respondent and one Uni Construction Sdn Bhd (4th Defendant in the High Court).

(3) At the Case Management on 04 April 2018, trial dates were fixed on 23 July 2018 - 25 July 2018.

(4) On 04 June 2018, the Appellant has filed its list of witness comprising Dato' Sri Ong Teng Chai ("Dato' Sri Ong") and one Ms Goh Wen Ling.

(5) On 03 July 2018, Dato' Sri Ong together with his wife, Datin Sri Chan Seok Fong has resigned as directors of the Appellant.

(6) On 16 July 2018, Dato' Sri Ong has presented a Winding-Up Petition against the Appellant pursuant to s 465(1)(c), (f) and (h) of the Companies Act 2016 .

(7) Enclosure 39 was filed on 18 July 2018.

(8) Enclosure 39 was heard and dismissed on 20 July 2018. The Appellant's or