Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/446030
maltatoday, WEDNESDAY, 14 JANUARY 2015 News MATTHEW AGIUS A court has rejected an applica- tion made by pardoned oil trader George Farrugia and his wife Catherine, requesting it to issue a warrant of prohibitory injunc- tion against his brothers and their companies, on the grounds that the court felt that the injunction had only been sought as an "arm- twisting measure". Farrugia was the man at the cen- tre of the 2013 oil procurement scandal in which he was investi- gated in connection with allega- tions of commissions paid by com- modity trader Trafigura, for the supply of oil to Enemalta in 2004. He received a presidential pardon in return for information on kick- backs to Enemalta officials. The application, filed by George Farrugia and his wife Catherine against John's Garage Ltd, Power- plan Ltd and 14 others requested the court to prevent the defend- ants from selling or transferring a total of 16 properties in order to safeguard a claim for "consider- able debts in their favour owed by companies owned by the defend- ants". George Farrugia later ceded the requested warrants against all the defendants bar John's Group Lim- ited. Despite George Farrugia's "sub- stantial payments", he claimed that the companies had not filed their accounts and this preclud- ed them from performing share transfers, to his detriment. Aside from this, Farrugia claimed that since the claims were publi- cised in the media, he could not continue his business with foreign oil companies, who consistently refused to deal with him and he was suffering damages as a con- sequence. The complainants had told the court that there had been a confidential agreement between the parties which was not being honoured. They said that despite its confidential nature, details of the agreement "began springing up and spreading with the four winds". George Farrugia had told the court how he had received "several objects" as part of an agreement between the parties, however they subsequently demanded to be paid €30-€40,000 for these objects. He insisted that the defendants could freely take them back. He denied claims that that the VAT depart- ment was owed €100,000 in arrears for the period of time for which he was a director of the company. Chris Farrugia, CEO of John's Group Limited disputed George Farrugia's claim that he had been given the shares for free, saying that the stock had been heavily undervalued and had been paid by set-off with a consignment of lubricating oil that they would receive from the plaintiffs. In ad- dition, the plaintiffs had taken oil stocks and petrol station equip- ment from the defendant as pay- ment for the amounts demanded by the plaintiffs. On the issue of unpaid taxes, the CEO testified that John's Group Limited had no outstanding bal- ances with the VAT department or the Inland Revenue Department. He added that talks were under- way with the VAT Commissioner with respect to the €100,000 as- sessment, as it was contended that the amount in question was not subject to VAT. He added that the only payment still outstand- ing was that owed by the plaintiffs in National Insurance payments, which they had undertaken to pay as part of an agreement between the parties. This payment had not taken place. In her judgment, Ms Justice Jac- queline Padovani Grima noted that the application contained se- rious procedural errors. It did not contain the particulars of a physi- cal person, as required by law and the damages suffered were speci- fied in a separate note – again, not as demanded by the law. The judge further noted that the claims made by plaintiffs in the application were contradictory as it was si- multaneously requesting the war- rant be issued on a precautionary basis, to safeguard rights against a non-observance of confidentiality and requesting damages. The court noted that the alleged losses were calculated on the ba- sis of a report compiled by George Farrugia, who was pardoned for his involvement in the oil procure- ment scandal. The judge pointed out that he had only been granted a presidential pardon in exchange for his collaboration with police investigations. The court was not convinced that the breach of rights allegedly suffered by the plaintiffs existed at first glance – prima facie. In ad- dition, it quoted several previous judgments establishing the princi- ple that the prohibitory injunction was an exceptional remedy of last resort, only to be used if the right to be protected would otherwise be irremediably damaged. "The warrant of prohibitory injunction is not to be used as a weapon to twist the arm of the other party into compliance with its demands. If this were the case, the warrant would no longer re- main a tool to protect a prima facie right, but a muzzle that pre- vents the defendants from the en- joyment of their rights." The court revoked its prior, tem- porary grant of the prohibitory injunction, holding that, although the plaintiffs had proved that they did indeed have a prima facie right, they had failed to prove that the prohibitory injunction was re- quired to protect it. MATTHEW AGIUS companies owned by the defend- ants". subsequently demanded to be paid €30-€40,000 for these objects. He not subject to VAT. He added that the only payment still outstand- a presidential pardon in exchange for his collaboration with police Court rejects oil trader's injunction against John's Group PHOTOGRAPHY BY RAY ATTARD Chris Farrugia, CEO of John's Group Limited disputed George Farrugia's (pictured) claim that he had been given the shares for free, saying that the stock had been heavily undervalued and had been paid by set-off with a consignment of lubricating oil that they would receive from the plaintiffs Opposition calls on government to publish all energy contracts MIRIAM DALLI THE government and opposition have yet to reach an agreement on the date for an energy debate to be held in parliament after the Nationalist Opposition request- ed the publication of documents, reports and contracts over the deals signed with Electrogas and Shanghai Electric Power. Yesterday evening at the end of the parliamentary sitting just before the adjournment, Oppo- sition whip David Agius asked what was the government's inten- tion, arguing that no agreement had been reached on the date of the debate. Without an agree- ment and without a motion, the debate cannot take place tomor- row, as was government's initial intention. While Carmelo Abela insisted that the government had in- formed the opposition would be adjourning this evening's sitting with the debate to be held tomor- row, Agius insisted that there "was no agreement": "We are asking the government on what motion it intends on discussing the energy deal as no agreement exists." The Speaker then suspended the sitting. When it resumed, Far- rugia asked the House whether an agreement had been reached. Abela explained that the govern- ment had wanted to carry out a debate in December but was postponed because the Opposi- tion leader was to be away. Abela then said that the House would now be adjourned with the normal legislative agenda, com- menting that the Opposition did not want the debate. On his part, Agius said the de- bate was postponed because Bu- suttil had had to attend a meeting of the EPP. He said the Opposi- tion wanted the debate but had also requested the necessary in- formation to be at hand. "If the Opposition wants to keep insisting against the debate then it is up to the Opposition," Abela said. The energy debate in parlia- ment was proposed by the gov- ernment last month when it an- nounced the new timeframes for the switch to gas. But during this evening's House Business Committee, PN deput y leader Mario de Marco and Home Affairs Minister Carmelo Abela could not reach an agreement on the way forward, even after de Marco told the government rep- resentatives that the Opposition would not force a date. "The government has only pub- lished the principles surround- ing the investment. If this par- liament wants a real debate, the requested information has to be tabled. The opposition under- stands that certain clauses could be commercially sensitive, but not all documents are. "We are interested in the con- ditions of the share purchases, the deadlines and conditions as stipulated in the contracts. The power purchase agreements and the ElectroGas agreements were never published. This is a genuine appeal on an important transaction," de Marco said. But Abela repeatedly said the debate was proposed by the gov- ernment because of its " belief in transparency", arguing that the information being requested by the opposition was "commercial- ly sensitive". Reacting to de Marco's propos- al that the opposition would treat confidential information as such, Labour's deput y whip Deborah Schembri said that commercially sensitive nature could neither be published nor debated. "It was a government initiative to have this debate in Decem- ber but it had to be postponed. It is also not the first time that contracts were not published by the different administrations be- cause of their nature. The ques- tions being asked are commer- cially sensitive. The government published what it could," Abela reiterated. He insisted that if the govern- ment had anything to hide, it would not have proposed the de- bate in the first place. As de Marco tried to convince Abela to check with his col- leagues on the potential publica- tion of further contracts, the PN deput y leader questioned how the Opposition could scrutinise the energy deal if it didn't have all the information. "Should we just depend on the statements issued by the govern- ment? If the government believes in a fair debate, let's get all the information and we will agree that commercially sensitive in- formation will not be published," he said. The final agreement between Enemalta and SEP was signed last month and will see the Chinese state-owned firm become the operator of the Delimara power station extension – the BWSC plant – following a €320 million capital injection.