Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1537913
VOLUNTEER organisations and associ- ations need all the support they can get, including professional assistance. It is what we are offering through the Pro-ACT (PROviders and Communities Together) initiative whereby profes- sionals, companies, students and others can donate a number of hours to the vol- unteering sector. The setting up of this voluntary bank will serve as the ideal platform for vol- unteers to tap specialised skills, advice, and professional assessments they may require for projects they plan to under- take. In this way, we try to make it as easy as possible for volunteer organisations registered with the Office of the Com- missioner for Voluntary Organisations, to find the ideal sources with whom they can form a strong relationship. The Pro-ACT bank of donators will be available on the Malta Council for the Voluntary Sector (MCVS) portal volun- teers.mt It will include a blend of professional people and companies willing to con- tribute in a significant way to Maltese society as part of their corporate social responsibility. This means voluntary or- ganisations and associations will have the alluring opportunity of using the ser- vices of lawyers, notaries, architects and teachers, as well as expert advice and di- rect professional help in various fields, among them marketing, accounts, web development, manual works on their premises, and other services. In the same process, the MCVS will develop a parallel system that collates information about the necessities of vol- untary organisations. This will help cre- ate a working system of collaboration between the volunteers and their dona- tors within agreed time schedules. We were only too happy during the Public Service Expo Village 2025 to meet and discuss the initiative with pro- fessionals in various fields, company and NGO representatives, as well as mem- bers of the public. One needs to emphasise the fact that the ProACT Bank is not merely and strictly an initiative within the voluntary sector, but it also lays down a solid plat- form for further social transformation based on the values of social justice, in- clusivity, and solidarity at both commu- nity and national levels. Volunteers and donators, tackling everyday challenges and new projects in harmony will ensure Maltese society stands to benefit. Social inclusion is one of the pillars of Vision 2050, unveiled by the govern- ment earlier this year. We are zealously committed to this vision and we look forward to a transparent Maltese soci- ety open to all and wherein community spirit is an essential part of our national identity. It means paving the way for a fair, united, and healthy society that fu- ture generations will inherit with pride. The Chief Executive of the Malta Council for the Voluntary Sector, Mau- ro Pace Parascandalo, pointed out the realities that volunteer organisations and associations, particularly the small- er ones, have to face, including the use of funds on professional services. At the Public Service Expo, he rightly indicated that professional donations of volun- tary time will, through an efficient and centralised structure, first reach those organisations and associations that need them most. Malta is lucky to have such an impres- sive array of volunteer organisations and associations devotedly working in an in- credible variety of fields. The ProACT initiative is, after all, the kind of infusion volunteers in Malta and Gozo have long been needing to enhance their dedicated contribution to society. 8 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 27 JULY 2025 OPINION & LAW WHEN the court is determining wheth- er a defendant is responsible for damag- es, it must establish a direct connection between cause and effect. This was held in Karl Busuttil et vs Matthew Schembri in the judgment delivered by Magistrate Victor Axiak on 7 July 2025. The applicants asked the court to or- der the defendant, Matthew Schembri, to pay €10,620 for damages incurred when rainwater entered their home. Al- though the defendant admitted to caus- ing some of the indicated damages—not all—he insisted the sum was not what the applicants were claiming. Karl Busuttil explained in his testimo- ny that in November 2021, rainwater had entered his kitchen and other parts of the house. The water was coming from the defendant's property. When visiting the property, the defendant said that he was to inform his insur- ance company. Busuttil said the defend- ant had admitted responsibility for the water ingress. However, the insurance company informed the defendant that he was not covered by the insurance policy. The applicant told the court that his architect and carpenter were of the opinion that the kitchen could not be fixed but had to be changed. The quota- tion for a change of the kitchen amount- ed to €10,984. The parties had a meeting and according to the applicant, the de- fendant agreed to pay in full. However, after he was informed that the insur- ance policy did not cover this incident, the defendant offered to pay €1,400 be- cause the kitchen was old and not worth €10,000. The applicant's architect presented his report to the court. He explained that water entered his client's property and damaged the kitchen and walls be- cause the defendant was still carrying out construction works in his property. His estimate of the damages was €9,000. Under cross-examination, the architect could not give a value of the kitchen be- fore the incident. The applicant brought as his witnesses three carpenters who said that the kitchen should be changed. The defendant testified that he did take the blame for the damage, however, the parties did not agree on the quantum of damages. He confirmed that although there was an insurance policy, it did not cover the damages because his property was still under construction. He insist- ed the damage to the cupboards did not warrant a brand-new kitchen. Meanwhile, a court-appointed expert concluded the actual damages amount- ed to €3,000. Magistrate Axiaq based his delibera- tions on the articles of the Civil Code which deal with damages. The law states that any person causing damage must be responsible for that damage. However, the law does not define neg- ligence but refers to a lack of prudence, diligence and attention. In Mary Vas- sallo vs Giovanni Mizzi et decided on 9 April 1949, the court held that there is no distinction between negligence and damages caused by a wrongful act, but the difference may be seen in the cause and the level of damage. Another judgment quoted by the court is Carmelo Farrugia et vs Victor Conti decided on 9 October 2003, which held that there should be a connection be- tween cause and effect. The court tackled the concept on bo- nus paterfamilias mentioned in Article 1031 of the Civil Code. The diligence which must be used when calculating whether there is any negligence is that of an ordinary man. Coming to this case, the court point- ed out the difference between the two reports presented by the applicant's architect. The second report listed the damages found in the property of the applicant. Although the parties did agree that the kitchen sustained some damage but there was no agreement on the compensation that had to be paid. The court expert held that the appli- cant's architect did not inspect the de- fendant's property. The architect had asserted that the bathroom and drains were complete, however, the court ex- pert held that this was not the case. Therefore, the damages other than the kitchen were not the defendant's re- sponsibility. It is for this reason that the court expert set the damages at €3,000. Although the court is not bound by its appointed expert's conclusions it cannot ignore them lightly. The court held that there is nothing in the expert's report that merits it to be ignored and moved to uphold the applicant's claim but limited the damage MALCOLM MIFSUD Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates Cause and effect must be connected in damages cases Julia Farrugia A voluntary bank Minister for inclusion and voluntary organisations Minister Julia Farrugia (Photo: DOI: Clodagh O'Neill)