Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1525812
8 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 25 AUGUST 2024 LETTERS & LAW Letters to the Editor Law Report Road works taking too long CAN anyone from Infrastructure Malta tell us when the works on Triq id-Daħla ta' San Tumas in Żejtun are going finish? It has been months now that works on a very small section of this important link road for Marsaskala residents has been going on and there seems to be no end in sight yet. What is taking the con- tractor so long to finish this road? If the excuse is that the works also involved the relaying of electricity, water and sew- age services, couldn't there have been a coordination committee to ensure work is done expeditiously? It is unacceptable that another summer will soon go by and a new scholastic year is about to begin and works on this road are not yet com- pleted. J. Cauchi Marsaskala Free medicines I am a regular reader of your newspa- per and I would like to respond to a letter that appeared recently about free medicines in Malta in which the writer complained of shortages and frequent changes in medicine products. After see- ing Smart Health on Euronews, I realised that there is great difficulty in the EU to manufacture certain medicines that is leading to shortages. At least, in Malta we are still receiving prescribed doses. I would like to remind your reader without being political that during the period 2003-2012, I had to wait some two to three months for cholesterol and diabetic pills. This was no joke. J. Borg Valletta An impassive government IT is worrying that foreign nationals are obtaining identity cards with ad- dresses belonging to Maltese nationals and using these to get work permits and receive treatment in hospital. It is even more worrying that the Home Affairs Ministry, which is responsible for Identità has remained silent on this scandal. I wholeheartedly agree with your editorial from 11 August that this is an issue of national se- curity. My simple mind tells me the authorities have no idea who is enti- tled to be in Malta let alone who these people are and where they are staying. I find this a matter of concern and yet the government remains impassive. Why is this? A. Mallia Sliema IF the debtor pays in part the bills of ex- change, the court may reject an applica- tion for them to be declared as an exec- utive title. This was held in the acts of an executive judicial letter in the names of GasanMamo Motors Limited vs Khurram Saeed Qadir Khan and Khan Group Limit- ed, before the First Hall of the Civil Courts presided over by Judge Doreen Clarke. The Defendants filed an application asking the court to suspend the execu- tion of 40 bills of exchange. GasanMa- mo objected to this. The court went through the facts of the case. On 24 June 2024, GasanMamo presented the judicial letter asking for it to be paid by the Defendants the sum of €18,800, which represented the 40 bills of exchange. The company referred to Article 253(e) of the Code of Organisa- tion and Civil Procedure, giving them 20 days to object to the execution of these bills of exchange. Copies of the bills of exchange were attached to the judicial letter. On 2 July 2024, the De- fendants paid €4,374, but on 8 July the Defendants presented the application to suspend the execution of the bills of exchange. Article 253(e) of the Code of Organisa- tion and Civil Procedure (COCP) reads: "The Following are executive titles: (e) bills of exchange and promissory notes issued in terms of the Commer- cial Code; Provided that the court which is competent according to the value of the bill of exchange or promissory note may, by decree which shall not be subject to appeal, suspend the execu- tion of such a bill of exchange or prom- issory note in whole or in part and with or without security, upon an application of the person opposing the execution of such bill of exchange or promissory note, to be filed within twenty days from the service of the judicial let- ter sent for the purpose of rendering the same bill of exchange or prom- issory note executable, on the grounds that the signature on the said bill of ex- change or promissory note is not that of the said person or of his mandatory or where such person brings forward grave and valid reasons to oppose the said execution and in such case any person demanding the payment of the bill of exchange or promissory note shall file an action according to the provisions of the Commercial Code. The judicial letter referred to above in this proviso shall, under pain of nullity, notify the debtor of the right given to him by this proviso" The Court referred to a judgment de- livered on 27 May 2021, Mark Gaffare- na vs Brian Lia. In this judgment the Court held that it should investigate the case on a prima facie basis. This is de- rived from what is said in the Commer- cial Code. The intention is that issues concerning bills of exchange are to be dealt and decided efficiently. If there are pleas which need in depth analysis, this should be done in a separate action. In another case Princess Holding Limited vs Wesley Kock, decided on 20 Decem- ber 2021, the court held that it was not going to investigate the reasons why the bill of exchange was issued. The court was not to hold sittings to hear evidence and submissions in order to decide on the suspension of the execution of the bills of exchange. In order for the execution to be sus- pended there must be grave reasons as mentioned in Article 253. The article of law does not specify what these grave reasons are. This was done in order to allow the court to exercise its discretion in the light of the particular circum- stances it has before it. In another case Michael Attard Ltd vs Turista Limit- ed, decided on 22 November 2012, the court pointed out that the term "grave and valid" reasons should not be wider than those mentioned in the commer- cial law. The Defendants in this case argued that they had paid for part of the debt and the bills of exchange of the amount paid was not returned to them. Howev- er, it was pointed out that the payment was made after the application was filed. This therefore, did not effect the executive title of the bills of exchange. Article 1169(2) of the Civil Code states that part payments should first go to- wards the interest due. Therefore, it was hard to state at this stage that the whole amount was part of the capital due. As such in these circumstances there are grave and valid reasons for at least part of the bills of exchange not to be exe- cuted. The court turned down the applica- tion. Part-payment of bills of exchange can block their execution LAW REPORT MALCOLM MIFSUD Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates