Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1523932
8 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 14 JULY 2024 LETTERS & LAW Letters to the Editor Law Report Over-tourism is a problem THE following cities have already been protesting against over tourism caused by extreme capitalism that is leading to noise pollution, occupation of public outdoor spaces, disruption to residen- tial areas and inflation. These cities are demanding a better economic model that benefits the locals and safe guards their localities in all aspects such as the environment, the infrastructure, the quality of life, affordability, preserva- tion of their cities' heritage and more. These cities are: Barcelona, Canary Islands, Athens, Malaga, Palma De Mallorca, Lake Como, Hallstat, Venice, Tokyo, Ibiza, Menorca, Florence. More cities will continue to join this outcry. When will the public representatives of Malta start learning from what is happening abroad? Will they continue to dig our own grave? Especially when we, as citizens, have been constantly hearing politicians from both sides of the spectrum preaching about mental health, physical health, the environ- ment, preservation of heritage, sup- porting standards of quality of life. Yet, it all remains under a form of opinion – nothing concrete gets done; justice delayed is justice denied. The environment is suffering and we Maltese citizens will be left with noth- ing but a concrete jungle – a concrete jungle which both parties condemn, a concrete jungle which both parties have promised us would never hap- pen… but it did. We are left with one party blaming the other, whilst that same party did the same exact thing and no responsibility, no accountability and no apology is ever made. And when tourists leave the island to return to their home filled with green spaces, better air quality and gardens in their back yards, trees lining their pavements and avenues… we Maltese will be left with nothing but dust. Past and present leaders never stopped pushing an extreme pro-business eco- nomic model that was doomed to en- slave us citizens and foreign workers, a model that was planned to privatise every aspect of Malta and dominate our lives. This is a model that in order to remain relevant can only survive on continued destruction. Whilst playing the victim card and whilst we citizens continue to believe your theatrical alienation… the com- mon hand that shook your two-party system's hand continues to win; your common friends, the capitalists – which swap sides after each election and continue to benefit at the cost of our suffering. The claim of a sustainable economy means nothing when there is a large amount of national debt, and where the country is forking out more money than it is receiving in return. Tourists have plenty of places to go to; there is no more the need to increase such places to the detriment of residents and at the expense of losing our localities' identities. The economy means nothing if it does not lead to peace of mind of us locals and our respective localities. The issue of public indecency by some tourists has been a growing concern. Herein, I propose a series of measures designed to educate and inform tourists about our laws and cultural expectations from the moment they set foot in our country. To tackle this effectively, it is crucial to address the issue at the ar- rival points such as airports, cruise and ferry terminals, buses and taxis along with the inclusion of accommodation facilities having the state to make these necessary amendments and to make it legally binding by law for every booking platform to supply visitors with a digital form of the law – tourists will have no excuse of claiming to not know the law in order to find a loophole and avoid a penalty. Billy J McBee Partit Socjali Indipendenti Residenti Beltin Valletta COURT upholds claim for payments of sum owed by applicant in a case of contractual obligations for services rendered, with analysis regard diverg- ing views on the actual role undertak- en. This was decided by the Court of Magistrates on 26 June 2023, where Dr Malcolm Mifsud appeared on behalf of plaintiff Saviour Camilleri. The Court was presided by Magistrate Marse-Ann Farrugia. In his application, plaintiff requested to be paid the sum for €5,900 as a bal- ance due to him for works relating to interior design for commercial premis- es in Rabat, alongside accrued interest. In 2012, Camilleri provided services to Borg, but was never duly paid for the works and services executed. In his statement of defence, Borg con- tended that no amounts were due since works were not completed nor carried out, and even if they had, excessive and unrealistic amounts were demanded. Defendant filed a counterclaim assert- ing that certain amounts had to be re- covered because obligations were not fulfilled, along a claim for additional expenses and damages caused by the delay of the premise's opening. The plaintiff argued that works were carried out as agreed upon in relation to de- signing the premises, producing a doc- ument for tender, and the bills of quan- tities. Witnesses in Court corroborated this view as argued by the plaintiff, im- plying that obligations were fulfilled. The parties concurred that the de- fendant had engaged the applicant to provide services relating to the com- mercial premises. Moreover, they agreed that the sum due for such works amounted to a total of €7,700, exclud- ing tax, with €2,360 already being paid. However, conflicting views arose with regard to facts of the case. The Court commenced by making reference to caselaw and held that when it is faced with conflicting versions it has to look at credibility, and only when this can- not be determined on a balance of prob- abilities, should the maxim actore non probante reus absolvitur be applied. The Court analysed the term turnkey, recognising that it was one of the main issues disputed between the parties. The parties had different opinions re- garding the role assumed by the plain- tiff. In the plaintiff's affidavit, it was ex- plicitly stated that the contract was not signed because the applicant refused to operate as a turnkey. The Court fur- ther elaborated that this term implies that, had the contract been one as the defendant contended, upon comple- tion of works, plaintiff would have sim- ply returned the key to the defendant with all works completed. However, the amount payable, being that of €9,086, could never indicate that execution of works were carried out. Furthermore, the Court maintained that the role of the plaintiff was not that of a turnkey, since the parties had agreed that esti- mated prices for works could be ob- tained from contractors. This was fur- ther substantiated by the fact that the defendant regularly sent contractors to obtain plans from the plaintiff. Another divergent opinion arose with regard to payments. Camilleri request- ed payments due for completed obli- gations. Noteworthy that the payment requests were split for specific trans- actions. From the evidence presented, both through evidence submitted in court and a tender vis-a-vis contrac- tors, designs and plans relating to four of the payments were carried out by the applicant. If the plans and designs had not been produced, it would not have been logical for the defendant to send a contractor to the applicant to obtain such plans. The claim for the seventh payment was denied, seeing that this was for supervision, however, it was maintained that the relationship be- tween parties terminated prior to the start of works hence supervision could never be carried out. As for the defendant's contention that amounts were excessive because he managed to negotiate on a lower amount with a third party, the Court relied on the principle of pacta sunt servanda and Article 993 of the Civil Code, which expressly holds: "Contracts must be carried out in good faith, and shall be binding not only in regard to the matter therein expressed, but also in regard to any consequence which, by equity, custom, or law, is in- cidental to the obligation, according to its nature". The mere fact that that after termi- nation of the relationship between the parties to the case the defendant nego- tiated a lower amount cannot negate the applicant's right to recover what is duly his, and this is based on the law of obligations. In light of the aforementioned rea- soning, the Court moved to partially uphold the plaintiff's claim and or- dered the defendant to pay €4,720 for the works carried out, excluding the amount which was due since supervi- sion was not carried out. Court upholds claim for payments of sum owed by applicant in a case of contractual obligations for services rendered JODIE DARMANIN Junior Associate Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates