Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1543912
MALTA'S participation in the Erasmus+ Youth programme reached an unprecedented high in 2025, marking the most suc- cessful year to date for the initi- ative. According to the European Un- ion Programmes Agency (EU- PA), Malta's national agency, the programme has expanded both in scale and depth. It ena- bled a greater number of partic- ipants—particularly those with fewer opportunities—to take part in transformative learning experiences across Europe. The surge in participation re- flects sustained engagement from youth organisations, in- formal groups and young in- dividuals eager to take part in international exchanges and collaborative projects. Youth exchanges, youth participation activities and youth worker mo- bility schemes saw particularly strong uptake, signalling both the dynamism of Malta's youth sector and the growing quality of projects being developed locally. Many of the approved initia- tives tackled themes central to the concerns of younger gen- erations. Projects addressed mental health and wellbeing, digital citizenship, democrat- ic participation, discrimination and intercultural dialogue—ar- eas increasingly shaping policy discussions across Europe. By creating spaces for collaboration and debate, Erasmus+ continues to respond to evolving social re- alities while encouraging young people to engage more actively in civic life. A notable development in 2025 was the expansion of mobility opportunities for youth work- ers themselves. Professionals working with young people were able to undertake training pro- grammes, job shadowing and peer-learning exchanges with counterparts across Europe. These experiences provide prac- tical tools and fresh perspectives that directly feed back into local youth services, strengthening organisations and improving support systems within Maltese communities. For participants, the impact of Erasmus+ extends well be- yond travel or cultural exposure. Youth exchanges foster a range of transferable skills—from leadership and teamwork to communication, resilience and creative problem-solving. Par- ticipants often report increased confidence and a stronger sense of belonging within both their local communities and the wider European project. International partnerships have also helped Maltese youth organisations modernise their approach. Collaboration with European counterparts has en- couraged the adoption of dig- ital tools, new methodologies and more inclusive program- ming. Such cooperation not only broadens opportunities for young Maltese participants but also strengthens Malta's visibil- ity within the wider European youth sector. Looking ahead, EUPA empha- sises that inclusivity remains central to the programme's mis- sion. Targeted outreach and ca- pacity-building initiatives aim to ensure that young people from diverse backgrounds—including those facing social or economic barriers—can benefit from the opportunities Erasmus+ pro- vides. As participation continues to grow, the programme is increas- ingly viewed as a cornerstone of Malta's youth development strategy, helping to nurture a generation of more confident, internationally minded and so- cially engaged citizens. NOT every threat will annul a contract. This was held in a judg- ment delivered by Judge Miriam Hayman on 6 March 2026 in the Best Deals International Limited (the plaintiff) vs Charlton Chet- cuti et. (the defendents). Best Deals claimed in its sworn application that Chetcuti was contracted in 2013 to deliver furniture to customers. His du- ties also included the collection of payments from the custom- ers. In 2014, it transpired that the defendant was keeping part of that money. In April 2015, he admitted to this and signed an agreement where he would re- pay the company €139,609. He paid €18,400 but then stopped paying his debt. The company asked the court to order him to pay €121,209. In his counterclaim, the defend- ant said that he signed the agree- ment under duress and did not owe any money to the company. He then asked for the €18,400 to be paid back. The company denied using undue pressure, insisting the de- fendant signed the agreement voluntarily. The company directors testi- fied on the procedure used when contracting the defendant. On a daily basis, a batch of papers con- taining a list of customers and the amount to be collected was handed to Chetcuti. The papers and the money were returned, checked and inputted in a com- puter system. Subsequently, the accounts department informed the directors that they were find- ing discrepancies. When the de- fendant was confronted with this, he just told the company that he had to check whether there were papers and monies in his truck. The company discovered a dis- crepancy of €139,609. One of the directors drafted the agreement and it was agreed that the defend- ant would continue working with the company and a sum was to be deducted from his earnings. The defendant testified that he always gave the papers and the money he collected to one of the directors and when she was not there to one of the other direc- tors. He said that he kept a record of what he gave the company and when confronted, he checked his truck just in case he had mislaid a paper or two. Chetcuti found nothing in his truck. Chetcuti de- scribed the pressure he was un- der to admit that he pocketed the money and claimed the company threatened to tell his father who at the time was unwell. He start- ed paying back the company after signing the agreement. A previous employer of the defendant testified that he had experienced the same situation. Chetcuti had kept to himself a smaller sum, which was eventu- ally returned. On the merits of the case, the court pointed out the two princi- ples governing a judicial process. The first is that the person mak- ing allegations must prove them and the second is when there is a conflict of evidence, the court may still arrive at a conclusion by seeing whether the testimony can be corroborated with other evidence. In this particular case the par- ties agreed on the sum owed to the company and how it was to be paid. The defendant started to pay on the basis of this agreement and even produced a cheque of €30,000, which was not hon- oured. The court also comment- ed that the system the plaintiff company used was acceptable and reconciliation could not be immediate because of the volume of work. The company was not disorganised and the defendant just sowed doubt without prov- ing his claims. The court also de- creed that the company was not at fault for the failure to receive payments from its clients. These were not one-off instances. It was the defendant who received payments and failed to deliver the money and documents as re- quired. The court pointed out that the original claim was for €139,609. However, a document present- ed in court indicated a claim for €115,854. The company did not justify this discrepancy. Since the defendant did pay €18,400, then the amount due was set at €97,454. The court dismissed the defendant's plea that the compa- ny was not credible. As to the counter-claims raised by Chetcuti, the court dismissed them. The court did not accept that the company had used un- due pressure. It transpired that Chetcuti issued a cheque belong- ing to his sister and it was she who informed their father. The court then upheld the com- pany's claims and ordered the de- fendant to pay €97,454. 8 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 15 MARCH 2026 OPINION & LAW Violence in obtaining consent must cause actual fear MALCOLM MIFSUD Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates Raphael Scerri National Coordinator EUPA Malta's Erasmus+ Youth Programme Reaches Record Milestone in 2025 By creating spaces for collaboration and debate, Erasmus+ continues to respond to evolving social realities while encouraging young people to engage more actively in civic life The court did not accept that the company had used undue pressure