The stay is pending the outcome of the prime minister’s appeal to the Court of Appeal against a High Court’s refusal to refer eight legal questions arising from the suit to the Federal Court for determination.

A three-member bench chaired by Ruzima Ghazali said a stay should be granted as Anwar had shown special circumstances.

“His appeal will be rendered nugatory if the application is disallowed,” said Ruzima.

Also on the panel hearing the application were Justices Wong Kian Kheong and Lim Hock Leng.

The court fixed Sept 2 for case management before a court registrar to determine a hearing date for the prime minister’s appeal.

Ruzima said parties were at liberty to apply for an early hearing date.

On June 4, High Court judge Justice Roz Mawar Rozain maintained the trial dates previously set for seven days between June 16 and June 25 after dismissing Anwar’s reference application.

In her decision, Roz Mawar said none of the questions posed in the application had crossed the threshold set out in Section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 to justify a referral to the apex court.

In a 21-page judgment, she said the application was misconceived as to the jurisdiction of the courts, and based on speculative doctrines with no constitutional footing.

On June 10, the Court of Appeal granted Anwar an interim stay pending today’s hearing of the prime minister’s stay application.

The prime minister wants the apex court to determine whether Articles 5(1), 8(1), 39, 40 and 43 of the Federal Constitution grant him qualified immunity from the suit filed by Yusoff four years ago.

Yusoff’s suit relates to events which allegedly took place before Anwar took office on Nov 22, 2022.

A grandson of the late Penang consumer advocate SM Mohamed Idris, Yusoff claims he was assaulted at Anwar’s home in Segambut in October 2018.

He is seeking general, special, aggravated and exemplary damages, as well as interest, costs and other relief deemed fit by the court.

Anwar denies the claim and has filed a countersuit.

Earlier today, lawyer Alan Wong, representing Anwar, said the appeal against Roz Mawar’s ruling centred on whether civil suits brought against a sitting prime minister should undergo a vetting process.

“There is a risk of the suit being politicised when the prime minister is holding office,” he said, adding that the suit should be stayed to preserve the status quo.

Wong said Yusoff had in his suit described his lawsuit as an action against a “prime minister in waiting”.

Wong added that proceeding with the trial would divert Anwar’s attention from both domestic governance and international engagements.

“We have shown special circumstances to warrant the stay of the trial pending the outcome of the appeal (before the Court of Appeal),” he said.

In reply, counsel Rafique Rashid Ali, representing Yusoff, submitted that the appeal on the reference questions was bound to fail as they were rhetorical and had no basis in Malaysian jurisprudence.

He also said the defendant knew the trial dates as they were fixed on June 6 last year.

Rafique said the suit was filed in July 2021 and pointed out that Anwar was appointed prime minister on Nov 22, 2022.

“Yet he filed the reference application only 23 days before the trial was to start through his new solicitors,” he said.

The lawyer said in the court of law, everyone should be treated equally, whether the litigant is a prime minister or a lay person.

Lawyers Megat Abdul Munir Megat Rafaie, Shahir Tahir, K Rajasegaran, and SM Kavyaasrini also appeared for Anwar while Nurmustanir Nor, Amirul Ar-Rashid Azman and Mior Nor Haidir Suhaimi acted for Yusoff.