Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Stay of execution pending appeal

Legal area

Court

24 Nov 2025

DAUD BIN ABDULLAH SANI

Citation

AB-83-21-01/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

AB-83-21-01/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Having proven that the seized cigarettes were prohibited imports and that the defendant, as lawful tenant present and in control of the single‑access premises, had possession and knowledge (via the rebuttable presumption under s135(2)), and because the defendant failed to rebut that presumption on the balance of probabilities, the prosecution proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt and the defendant is guilty under s135(1)(d) Customs Act 1967.
10 Nov 2025

TRESENERGY SDN BHD 1. ) MOHD FAUZI BIN YA'AKOB 2. ) MTC ENGINEERING SDN BHD

Citation

BA-22NCvC-603-12/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-603-12/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Both preliminary objections dismissed: the Sanction was validly issued by the Official Receiver and Liquidator under s.486 CA 2016 and Part I of the Twelfth Schedule, Dato' Hafidz as contributory had authority to affirm the affidavits (Sanction copy/communication and lack of challenge by other contributory), and the Defendants waived any objection by participating in the assessment hearings and failing to raise the complaint earlier.
7 Jul 2025

CIMB BANK BERHAD SONATA CREST SDN BHD PENCELAH MEGAFEST SDN. BHD. (DALAM LIKUIDASI)

Citation

JA-24FC-337-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-24FC-337-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Leave to intervene and the application to suspend execution were refused because the order for sale had been made and perfected (court functus officio), PYD failed to show a direct legal interest in the property or any live issue in these proceedings affecting PYD, statutory registration of title and charge under the Torrens system (s.89 and s.340 NLC) protected Plaintiff's registered charge, the caveats relied on by PYD were withdrawn or lapsed and thus ineffective, and PYD did not establish the special circumstances necessary to justify a stay of execution pending appeal.
13 Nov 2024

MD JONAYEDUL

Citation

WA-83-9720-11/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

WA-83-9720-11/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court found the guilty plea valid under required safeguards and lawfully recorded the conviction; the sentence of 14 days imprisonment from date of arrest and RM2000 fine (six months default) falls within statutory limits under Section 342 and is proportionate considering seriousness and deterrent needs; the application for stay of execution was refused because the defence failed to demonstrate special or exceptional circumstances.
4 Jul 2024

LIM JEN LIN @ LIM JEN LING 1. ) PETRONAS REFINERY AND PETROCHEMICAL CORPORATION SDN BHD 2. ) PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD

Citation

W-02(NCvC)(A)-1033-06/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

W-02(NCvC)(A)-1033-06/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

A stay of execution was granted because the appellant discharged the onus of showing special circumstances: publication of the vexatious‑litigant order in the Gazette and on public databases is irreversible, would cause serious and irreparable reputational and economic harm that cannot be remedied by costs, and on balance of convenience the prejudice to the appellant outweighs the respondents' enforcement interest, justifying a stay pending appeal.
8 May 2024

PREMANAATHAN A/L SUNDRARAJU

Citation

WA-83D-9955-09/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

WA-83D-9955-09/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court accepted prosecution evidence including chemist analysis and witnesses that the drugs were found in the accused's hand and that the accused had custody/control and knowledge; SP3's recorded statement materially contradicted his in-court evidence and was used to impeach him; defence account of a third person was an afterthought and not credible; on the whole evidence the prosecution proved both elements beyond reasonable doubt so the accused was convicted on both counts and sentenced; a conditional stay pending appeal was granted.
27 Feb 2024

MOHAMMAD MANIK ALI

Citation

CA-43-3-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CA-43-3-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Applicant did not possess a valid Pass on the date of arrest; RTK status 'Selesai' without confirmation of PLKS or formal issuance does not amount to lawful authorization under s.6(1)(c); therefore the charge, plea of guilty, conviction were valid; sentence of imprisonment was reduced from 9 to 8 months and one stroke of caning was affirmed; however, in the interests of justice the court granted a stay of execution pending appeal subject to specified bail conditions given new administrative letters and circumstances.
10 Mar 2023

SINOHYDRO CORPORATION (M) SDN BHD KAJ DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD

Citation

WA-36-31-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-36-31-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court granted the stay of execution pending disposal of the CIPAA appeals based on public interest and real risk of rendering the appeals nugatory, and allowed the appeal from the Deputy Registrar to set aside/discharge the ex-parte Writ of Seizure and Sale and Prohibitory Order because Sinohydro committed material non-disclosure in the ex-parte application and thus breached the duty of full and frank disclosure.
8 Dec 2022

NIK SYAZWAN BIN IBRAHIM

Citation

AB-44-50-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AB-44-50-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to discharge the burden of proof to establish 'special circumstances' under s.311 CPC and did not provide particulars or documentary evidence (including the petition of appeal and grounds) to demonstrate a real prospect of success on appeal; family hardship alone, without evidential support or exceptional factors, does not constitute special circumstances to justify a stay of execution.
19 Oct 2022

Compugates Development and Mining Sdn Bhd Main Uptown Sdn Bhd

Citation

BA-24NCVC-1150-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24NCVC-1150-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

A stay of execution pending appeal was granted because the removal of the private caveat would have rendered the appeal nugatory and constituted a special circumstance under Federal Court authority; instead of ordering the Registrar of Titles to reinstate the caveat the Court granted an interim injunction restraining the plaintiff from selling, transferring, disposing or creating any encumbrance on the land pending the appeal.