Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1532272
9 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 9 FEBRUARY 2025 OPINION LAW Law Report A request for retrial will not be accepted by the Court if the request contests the in- terpretation of the First Court. This was held in Malcolm Cassar vs Edrichton Es- tates Limited decided on the 10 December 2024 by the Court of Appeal. The Court was presided over by Judge Robert Man- gion, Judge Grazio Mercieca and Judge Christian Falzon Scerri. In 2014, the plaintiff had opened a claim against the defendant company regarding a dispute on the amount of ground rent which should be paid to the defendant company in relation to an apartment in St Paul's Bay. The plain- tiff alleged that the amount of ground rent which was being charged was not in conformity with the previous con- tracts of sale of the property, which ex- plicitly outlined how the ground rent was to be increased and when this was to happen. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant was increasing the whole amount of ground rent when only a part had to be increased at certain intervals. The defendant outright denied these claims and stated that the amount had been previously agreed upon with the previous owner of the apartment. The defendant also filed a counter-claim against the plaintiff asking the Court to order him to pay the amount of ground rent which was agreed upon according to the previous contract of sale. In its decision, the Court denied all of Edrichton's counterclaims and the sec- ond claim of the plaintiff which was in relation to the amount of the remaining increase in ground rent, following the redemption of part of it. Both of the parties decided to appeal the decision asking the court to reconsider and re- form the judgment. The Court of Ap- peal confirmed the decision of the first court and acceded to the second claim of the plaintiff. It ordered Edrichton to pay all of the expenses of the case. Edrichton filed a court application on 13 February 2024 asking the Court for a retrial on the basis of Article 811(e) and (l) of Chapter 12 of the Laws of Malta. It alleged that the Court had applied the law wrongly and that the sentence given by the Court of Appeal contained fac- tual mistakes. The Court stated that a judgment which is given must not be re- voked easily and should only be revoked for serious and grave reasons, in the sense that, if the judgment were to re- main in place it would go against public order. Therefore, retrial can only take place under those circumstances strict- ly outlined in the law which are strictly interpreted without any analogy. In its court application for retrial, Edrichton stated that the Court failed to read the contracts outlining the amount of ground rent and increase in ground rent in question properly. It said that the contract did not distinguish be- tween the amount of ground rent and the amount of increase in ground rent and that a global amount was agreed upon. However, the Court said that ar- ticle 811(I) of Chapter 12 of the laws of Malta clearly states that a retrial can be sought when the sentence is the result of a mistake which is clearly shown in the acts and/or documents of the case. It said that just because the Court did not interpret a clause in the contract the way Edrichton wanted it to, does not mean that the Court misread the con- tract or that it made its decision on the supposition that the contract in ques- tion was stating one thing, when in fact it was stating another. Although Edrich- ton has every right not to agree with the Court's decision, it does not mean that there is a mistake of fact. The Court quoted from the judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal on the 31 May 2019 in the names of Joseph Agius et vs Golu Spiteri whereby the Court of Appeal had stated that a case for retrial must not be made for there to be a different interpretation from the Court which would have decided the case, because otherwise the Court hear- ing the retrial would be considering an appeal from a decision that cannot be appealed. Therefore, in light of the above, the Court denied Edrichton's request for a retrial and also ordered the company to pay €500 to the Court Registry for mak- ing a request for a retrial for vexatious reasons. A request for retrial cannot be made to contest the interpretation of First Court JODIE DARMANIN Junior Associate Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates Thomas Bajada Thomas Bajada is an MEP for the Labour Party Water is life GROWING up on a Mediterranean island, I learned early on that water is nothing less than life itself. Malta and Gozo, surround- ed by water, yet constantly battling water scarcity, are living testaments to the fragil- ity of this precious resource. As the newly appointed Rapporteur for the European Parliament's Water Resilience Strategy In- itiative, I am determined to champion bold and decisive actions needed to safeguard Europe's water future. Water resilience may not always make headlines, but it should. This invisible lifeline sustains our ecosystems, fuels our economies and ensures our very surviv- al. In a rapidly warming world, droughts, floods and pollution, are not abstract threats – they are harsh realities disrupt- ing communities across the Union. From sun-scorched agricultural lands in south- ern Europe, to devastating floods across the mainland, the evidence is clear: Eu- rope's water systems are under stress, and inaction is no longer an option. The Water Resilience Strategy Initiative aims to address these pressing challenges. It will serve as the foundation for the Eu- ropean Commission's forthcoming Euro- pean Water Resilience Strategy, set to be adopted later this year. At its heart, my re- port targets six crucial priorities: improv- ing water efficiency, tackling pollution, climate adaptation, funding, embracing innovation and digitalisation across the water cycle, and finally, cross-border co- operation. Without a decisive push on these fronts, we risk leaving Europe ill equipped to face the water crises of today, let alone those of tomorrow. We need a bold and comprehensive framework for a stronger, more compet- itive and more resilient Europe, ready to tackle both current and future water challenges. Water is not a niche issue. It is essential for agriculture, industry, public health, and biodiversity, making it central to the Union's sustainability and competi- tiveness ambitions. By uniting fragmented elements, we can provide clear guidance to Member States and stakeholders towards ensuring sustainable water management. This is the strength of the European Un- ion: our capacity to come together, across borders and sectors, to tackle shared chal- lenges with collective resolve. The European Parliament is paving the way towards a genuine commitment to elevating water resilience to the forefront of EU policy. By streamlining efforts across sectors, we can make water resilience a cornerstone of Europe's sustainability goals, ensuring that our water systems are equipped to adapt and recover in the face of crises. This mission is deeply personal. For communities like ours, in the heart of the warming Mediterranean, water scarci- ty is not a distant possibility, but a daily reality. However, this is not just Malta's story. From urban centres to rural villag- es across Europe, water connects us all. It transcends politics, borders, and ideology, demanding nothing less than cross-border action grounded in solidarity. My appointment as rapporteur, on behalf of the Socialists and Democrats Group, is a reflection of trust — in youth and in the need for fresh energy to tackle old prob- lems. It is a trust I take seriously. I bring to this responsibility a determination to challenge complacency, bridge divides, and drive an ambitious agenda, rooted in political resolve and scientific rigor. Water is more than a resource; it is the foundation of life itself. We cannot afford to treat it as infinite anymore. Together, we can build a Union where water resilience is not an afterthought, but a fundamental pillar of our collective fu- ture. If we act now, we can ensure that this lifeline endures for generations to come.