The court can grant a stay of execution of a judgment debt if 'special circumstances' are shown, balancing the rights of the judgment creditor and debtor pending appeal.

Lee Swee Seng JCA:

[1] This judgment of the Court explores whether "special circumstances" exist under which the execution of payment of a judgment debt may be stayed unconditionally and if not, whether there are factors that the Court may nevertheless have regard to that may justify a conditional stay of either the whole or part of the judgment sum pending the disposal of an appeal.

[2] The appellants were dissatisfied with part of the judgment of the High Court which heard their related disputes with the respondents in some suits consolidated and heard together. They have thus filed two applications both in encl 4 in NU 4 for Civil Appeal No: W-02(NCC)(W)-1528-08-2021 and NU5 for Civil Appeal No: W-02(NCC)(W)-1595-08-2021 to stay the execution of the judgments of the High Court below where the appellants had filed two separate appeals to the Court of Appeal.

[3] The appellants may be collectively and conveniently referred to as the Renew Capital (M) Sdn Bhd's parties or "RC Parties" and the respondents as the ADM Ventures (M) Sdn Bhd's parties or the "ADM Parties". A helpful summary of the parties prepared by the appellants' solicitors as they appeared in the High Court is set out in the table below; encapsulating the enmeshment of a ruptured business joint-venture:

[4] Suit 245 is Suit No: WA-22NCC-245-06-2016 in the Kuala Lumpur High Court where the plaintiffs there are ADM, Arrasu and Maren as the 1st to the 3rd plaintiffs respectively and RC, TN, Marcus, Dilantha and GTG are the 1st to the 5th defendants respectively.

[5] OS 47 is Originating Summons No: WA-24NCC-47-02-2016 in the Kuala Lumpur High Court where ADM is the plaintiff and the RC, TN, TK, Marcus, Dr Neil, Dilantha, Faizal Maulana bin Hassan Kutti, City Motorsports Sdn Bhd and GTG as the 1st to the 9th defendants respectively.

[6] For the purpose of the application in NU 4, only OS 47 is relevant and is the more substantial application involving a stay of the execution of the monetary judgment of RM22,666,195.16 by the appellants with respect to payment of the judgment sum to ADM. This was a claim brought by ADM pursuant to s 181, Companies Act 1965 in respect of GTG. GTG is a company in which both RC and ADM hold 50% of the shares.

[7] The High Court allowed OS 47, concluding that several grounds of oppression had been made out by ADM. On that basis, the learned Judge ordered that GTG be wound-up (as a remedy for oppression) and further ordered the appellants to pay a sum of RM22,666,195.16 to ADM with a global cost of RM500,000.00. The appellants filed their appeals on 11 August 2021 in W-02(NCC)(W)-1528-08/2021. The appellants there are RC, TN, TK, Marcus and Dr Neil as the 1st to the 5th appellant respectively. The respondents in the appeal are ADM and GTG.

[8] In NU 4 the Notice of Motion filed is for stay of the execution or enforcement of the monetary part of the judgment of the High Court pending the disposal of their appeal in the Court of Appeal. The said judgment was delivered in respect of Suit 245 and OS 47 in the High Court, which were heard together.

[9] NU5 is another application filed for stay of execution with respect to a much lesser sum in the costs awarded against the appellants in a series of inter-related suits heard together in the High Court below wherein costs of RM100,000.00 had been awarded against the appellants for the dismissal of their claims against the respondents for which an appeal in W-02(NCC)(W)- 1595-08-2021 had been filed for appeal to the Court of Appeal.

[10] The relevant suits heard together were Suit No WA-22NCC-19- 01/2016 ("Suit 19"), Suit No WA-22NCC-34-01-201 ("Suit 34") dan Suit No: WA- 22NCC-272-08-2016 ("Suit 272"). For the purpose of the application before this Court, only Suit 19 is relevant. This was a claim brought by RC and TN for RM8.5 million against Arrasu and Maren for wrongfully inducing RC and TN into advancing RM8.5 million to GTG on the representation that ADM would reciprocate by advancing the sa