Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1543144
MALTA, not unlike other Euro- pean countries, is experiencing a rapidly ageing population. Pro- jections made by the European Commission show that by 2030, 21% of the Maltese population will be older than 65 years of age, with this cohort increas- ing to 26% by the year 2050. As one grows older one tends to be prone to more health-related is- sues. It is no secret that the older persons make disproportionate use of the national health servic- es. This means that as the pop- ulation ages, the health services are going to be under increasing pressure. Benjamin Franklin once said that "by failing to prepare, one is preparing to fail". This is why, to continue offering a high level of care, whilst facing future challenges associated with an aging population, we need to tweak the model of care that we currently offer our old- er persons. This is where the concept of bedded intermedi- ate care (IC) comes in. This is a win-win model of health care which aims to provide high lev- el of care to older person, de- livered by specialists in geriat- ric medicine, away from Mater Dei Hospital. A beneficial side effect of this approach is that it will alleviate some of the huge pressure on beds at Mater Dei Hospital. This model is already being piloted at an IC unit located on the grounds of St Vincent de Paul (SVP) with very pos- itive outcomes. The unit has been receiving patients suffer- ing from common, older per- sons-related problems. These patients, who would have oth- erwise been admitted to MDH, receive high level dedicated care. It is worth noting that the very great majority of patients admitted to IC at SVP, have been successfully discharged back to their original destina- tion. The success of this pilot pro- ject meant that the IC unit at SVP has now expanded to a 40-bed unit spread over two wards, resulting in a more pos- itive impact. It is planned that within the next few years Malta will see the addition of a brand new 300-bed intermediate care hospital at SVP. Undoubtedly, this IC hospital will have a very positive impact on the level of care that we can offer to older persons, whilst ensuring that MDH continues to function as an efficient acute care hospital. We are facing the challenges ahead with optimism. THE Court of Appeal presid- ed by Mr Justice Lawrence Mintoff dismissed the appeal filed by Conrad Galea, trading as Chanlai Auto Dealer, against Neil Andrew Vella. The judgment delivered on 4 February 2026, confirmed a €9,000 payment obligation arising from a post sale 'return and resell' arrangement. In June 2017, Neil Andrew Vella bought a Vauxhall In- signia for €9,000 from Conrad Galea. The car soon proved defective. On 29 August 2017, the parties signed a simple agreement under which Vella returned the car to Galea and would receive €9,000 "upon sale of the vehicle". Vella also claimed about €1,800 spent on repairs and parts. In 2018, Vella sued, seeking a refund of the €9,000 and re- imbursement of €1,800 in re- pairs. Galea argued there was no refund promise, only an undertaking to try to resell. He also argued that he was not the proper defendant in his "trad- ing name" and that the action was premature because the car had not yet been sold. Vella held that the repairs claim was either not a recognised remedy or time barred. The Magistrates Court in its judgment of 26 February 2025 partly upheld Vella's claim. It rejected the "wrong defendant" objection, holding that suing Conrad Galea personally was correct because a trading name has no separate legal personal- ity. The court analysed whether Vella's case related to latent defects as outlined in the Civ- il Code. It found that the June 2017 sale had been effective- ly rescinded when Vella re- turned the car and the parties signed the August agreement. Therefore, the case was not the classic defects action but an attempt to enforce the August 2017 agreement. Since the August agreement did not preserve any right to re- pair costs, the court dismissed the claim for reimbursement of repairs notwithstanding refer- ences to defects. The court also held that Vel- la's right to payment depended on Galea finding a buyer. How- ever, from Galea's own testi- mony there had been at least one concrete purchase offer. The Magistrates Court ruled the condition had occurred and ordered Galea to pay €9,000 plus legal interest from 7 September 2018. The Court of Appeal started by considering the first request with regard to the nature of the action. Galea argued the suit was really a redhibitory defects claim tied to the June 2017 sale. The Court of Appeal disagreed since the pleading itself an- chored the claim in the 29 Au- gust 2017 agreement where it was written "I handed the car to Galea; upon sale I am to receive €9,000". The court affirmed that the sale was rescinded when the car was returned and the agreement signed, and that the case properly enforced the August agreement, not the de- fects regime. The second ground of appeal was whether the condition that triggered the payment had oc- curred. The Court of Appeal accepted that payment was tied to a suspensive condition—the car's sale. But the court also stressed that this cannot sus- pend payment indefinitely while Galea kept both the vehi- cle and Vella's €9,000. Evidence showed that on 20 October 2017 the car was re registered to Chanlai Auto Dealer, and that Galea had at least one purchase offer, which he de- clined. The court observed the First Court was overcautious in downplaying the legal effect of the re registration and, in any event, Galea was not free to re- fuse reasonable avenues to sell and then plead non occurrence of the condition. The Court of Appeal held that the condition was fulfilled so payment was due. The Court of Appeal then dealt with the third ground of appeal. Galea argued that Vella should have asked the court to set a time limit instead of requesting payment. The court held that extended inac- tion and refusal to sell could amount to hindering payment. Vella's case sought to recov- er the price under the August agreement and did not need a separate 'fix a term' action first. The court then moved to dis- miss the appeal. 8 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 8 FEBRUARY 2026 OPINION & LAW When a 'return and resell' deal triggers payment MALCOLM MIFSUD Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates Malcolm Paul Agius Galea Parliamentary Secretary Active Ageing Improving the care of older persons The court held that extended inaction and refusal to sell could amount to hindering payment. Vella's case sought to recover the price under the August agreement and did not need a separate 'fix a term' action first