A three-man bench led by Chief Judge of Malaya Ahmad Maarof said each case involved questions of legal importance which needed further argument.
Also on the bench were Balia Yusof Wahi and David Wong Dak Wah.
The bench allowed four legal questions framed by Pua which will be argued on a date to be fixed.
Pua’s lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, in his submission, said the Court of Appeal’s written judgment on March 23 must be set aside as it would be binding on the High Court.
“Its ruling warrants intervention by the Federal Court,” he said, urging that leave be granted.
Malik said the High Court and Court of Appeal had also failed to strike a balance in protecting Pua’s freedom of speech when Najib sought an interim injunction to remove the video from his Facebook.
He said the Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the High Court to order the interim injunction just because former attorney-general (AG) Mohamed Apandi Ali had come to the conclusion that Najib did no wrong regarding the 1MDB fiasco and RM2.6 billion found in his private bank account.
“Just because the AG is not going to prosecute Najib, it does mean one cannot bring a civil action to prove the case,” he said.
He said the Court of Appeal had also concluded that what Pua said about the former prime minister was untrue.
Najib’s lawyer Mohd Hafarizam Harun, in urging the bench to dismiss the application, said leave should not be given as Pua could have his day in court during the defamation trial.
“The interim injunction was given as Najib stands to suffer more if the video is in the public domain,” he said.
He said the Court of Appeal had acted correctly when it took judicial notice of Apandi’s decision not to frame charges against Najib.
Court of Appeal judge Yaacob Md Sam said the interim injunction was given to the former prime minister as Pua’s defence was bound to fail.
Yaacob said this was because Apandi had cleared Najib of any criminal offence in relation to 1MDB.
He said the appellate court was of the view that High Court judge Mohd Zaki Abdul Wahab did not err in fact or law in exercising his discretion in favour of allowing the injunction against Pua.
Yaacob said the facts to be judicially noticed existed in the pleadings of the then-prime minister in response to Pua’s defence.
Pua, in his defence, stated that the RM2.6 billion (US$681 million in 2013) had been diverted from state investment arm 1MDB.
Yaacob said the AG, at a press conference on Jan 26, 2016, had confirmed the money was a gift from an Arab royal family.
“Such a decision by the AG is within the framework of our Federal Constitution under Article 145. That fact had, therefore, been established without the need of further formal proof of the same by a witness,” he said.
On Aug 4, Zaki dismissed Pua’s application that the video should remain on his Facebook page to be viewed by the public pending the outcome of Najib’s defamation suit.
Najib, in his statement of claim filed on April 21, had said a two-minute, 21-second video entitled “BN abandons all Bills to give precedence to PAS RUU355 Private Member’s Bill” was uploaded on Pua’s Facebook page.
Najib said the live video was directed at him and was done with malice and bad intention to defame him.
He said Pua had also stated in the video that the tabling of the bill was a charade to divert attention from the 1MDB fiasco and the RM2.6 billion found in the private accounts of Najib.
Ex-judge: Pua’s defence valid, injunction on video should be lifted
Appeals court says Najib deserves injunction against Pua’s video