MaltaToday previous editions

MALTATODAY 21 May 2023

Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1499757

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 38 of 39

maltatoday | SUNDAY • 21 MAY 2023 11 LAW CLASSIFIEDS In the case "l-Avukat Mal- colm Mifsud u l-Avukat Cedric Mifsud vs il-Bord ta' Sorveljan- za Dwar Sanzjonijiet" before the Judge Hon. Audrey Dem- icoli, the Court declared a fine issued by the Sanctions Mon- itoring Board on the plaintiffs to be null and invalid. The case challenged the legal validity of a fine issued by the Sanctions Monitoring Board, on the basis of judicial review of an administrative decision in terms of the subarticles of Article 469A of Chapter 12, the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure. The Board is an intergovernmental entity whose chairman is appointed by the Minister for Foreign Af- fairs. The Court first determined two preliminary exceptions which were raised by the de- fendants, the Board's legal rep- resentatives. Firstly, that the action could not subsist in vir- tue of the fact that the plain- tiffs had paid the fine merits of the case and as such according to the defendants they accept- ed the fine imposed so there is nothing to review. A second preliminary plea claimed that this particular Board does not fall under the definition of a 'public authority' as outlined in terms of the said Article 469A. In a preliminary ruling the Civil Court found that the plaintiffs had in fact paid the fine under protest and there- fore by no stretch of the im- agination could the payment of the fine be construed as an acceptance of such fine. The Court in its preliminary ruling noted that the fine had only been settled once the plaintiffs were informed that, should they not pay, the Board would impose a daily cumulative sanction. Secondly, the Court noted that the fine was paid at the last minute and thirdly that the plaintiffs had express- ly stated in writing that they were not in agreement with the fine and that they would be contesting it, such word- ing sufficed in the eyes of the Court, notwithstanding the fact that the words 'under protest' were not stated. In addition, the Court took note that in view that there is no appeal procedure which could suspend the imposition of the fine, therefore the only means to ensure that the fine would not keep spiralling, even if to a limited amount, was to pay it and subsequently contest it by means of a judicial review case. As to the plea that the Sanc- tions Monitoring Board did not constitute a public author- ity, the Court in its preliminary ruling stated that while the definition of 'public authority' found in Article 469A includes a specific definition of a Board, it is to be pointed out that the wording used is 'includes' and therefore this indicates that the intention of the legislator was not to have just one type of Board falling under the defi- nition, but many others. The Court then went into a de- tailed analysis of the functions of the Board and found that it is in fact a 'public authority'. In its final judgment the Court pointed out that in a judicial review of an adminis- trative act case, it will not look into the merits of the admin- istrative decision, but will in- stead assess whether the deci- sion was taken beyond the legal powers of the public authority in terms of Article 469A (1). As to the first grounds by the plaintiffs that the decision tak- en breached the fundamen- tal constitutional right to a fair hearing the Court found that as an ordinary Court (as opposed to a Constitutional Court) it could not review such act on the basis of a breach of a constitutional right. The Court then examined the decision to fine Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates on the basis of Article 469A (b) (ii) which is the legal basis to challenge an administrative act which fails to respect the principles of natural justice or is committed without being in line with the mandatory procedural steps leading up to such decision. The facts of this case saw the defendant Board dishing out a fine without first making con- tact and notifying the plaintiff in any way that they would be receiving such a penalty. The Board had mistakenly sent a letter to Aegis Corporate Ser- vices Limited, however when informed that this company was not involved with the ship in question, the Board did not formally inform Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates that they were being investigated, but they simply proceeded to issue the fine. The Court found that the lack of the Board to send an official notice to Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates informing them that they are being inves- tigated and requesting them to make their submissions could have been committed as a re- sult of efficiency and not as a result of bad faith. The Court also dismissed the scenario that the Board could have come to the same con- clusion as it did when review- ing the submissions of Aegis Company Limited. Among other case law the Court quot- ed Lord Wright in the decision pronounced by the House of Lords in the UK in the names of General Medical Council v. Spackman: "If the principles of natural justice are violated in respect of any decision, it is, in- deed, immaterial whether the same decision would have been arrived at in the absence of the departure from the essential principles of justice. The deci- sion must be declared to be no decision". This is what the Mal- tese Court did as it found that the lack of procedural steps in terms of natural justice ren- dered the administrative de- cision to award the fine null, invalid and without effect. The Court ordered that the fine is refunded in its entire- ty and the defendant is to pay the Court expenses. This judgment is another impor- tant milestone in the field of judicial review of administra- tive decisions taken in breach of the legal steps leading up to such decisions, which de- cisions may be judicially chal- lenged and overturned. Nullifying a fine which breaches natural justice LAW REPORT MALCOLM MIFSUD Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION MARSALFORN, Gozo - holiday apartments for short or long lets with magnificent sea-views. Call 21556021, 27556021, 79426883 PROPERTY TO LET SHOP TO LEASE - Class 4 B 60 sqm corner shop to lease in San Gwann. Key money €49,888 and €40 a day rental. Call on 79703404. XLENDI - catering premises in prime site to let. Can be used for other commercial purposes. Phone 79493021, 79426883, 77481592 or 77484029 SERVICES COLLECTIBLE items such panini albums and loose stickers, old postcards and posted envelopes, med- als, militaria, coins and paper money, books, toys, stamps, badges, paintings, gold & silver items etc. Call on 21310238, 99246632. SITUATIONS VACANT CHEF - required for busy hotel restaurant in Naxxar. Must be fluent in English, be able to work flexible hours including weekends and public holidays. Min 3 years' experience in similar position. Call +365 2798 8357 for more info - The Village Hotel LTD. CLASSIFIEDS INFO @MEDIATODAY.COM.MT

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of MaltaToday previous editions - MALTATODAY 21 May 2023