Skip to main content
COVID19 MeasuresLitigation & Dispute Resolution

Clarification of Powers of Superintendent of Public Health

The Superintendent of Public Health has issued a number of measures (through legal notices) in the wake of the Covid-19 virus in accordance to what is, in the opinion of the Superintendent of Public Health, expedient for the prevention or mitigation of disease. Of note are LN 61 of 2020 (later amended by LN 84 of 2020) which ordered the suspension of all legal and judicial time limits and LN 65 of 2020 (later amended by LN 97 of 2020) which ordered the closure of the Courts of Malta as well as the Court Registry. The taking of these measures is unprecedented…
Kirk Brincau
27th March 2020
COVID19 MeasuresLitigation & Dispute Resolution

Re-Opening of Judicial Entities not Operating from the Building of the Court

The Closure of Courts of Justice (Amendment) Order, LN 97 of 2020, has limited the definition of 'Court' as previously considered in LN 65 of 2020 (also amended by LN 84 of 2020) to only consider Superior and Inferior Courts, irrespective of their competence or jurisdiction and tribunals, boards, commissions, committees or other entities which operate from the building of the Courts of Justice before which any proceedings are heard or procedures undertaken which are subject to legal, judicial or administrative time limits for the filing of acts. This effectively means that tribunals, boards, commissions, committees or other entities which…
Kirk Brincau
25th March 2020
COVID19 MeasuresLitigation & Dispute Resolution

Court Closure and Suspension of Legal Terms

On the 13th of March 2020, as a precautionary measure against the spread of the COVID-19 virus, the Superintendent of Public Health, being the person legally responsible for public health in Malta, has, through the publication of Legal Notice 65 of 2020, ordered the closure of the Courts of Malta as well as the Court Registry for an indefinite term commencing on the 16th of March 2020. In an attempt to limit the possibly hazardous and unnecessary gathering of large groups of persons, this order establishes the closure of all courts, regardless of their competence and jurisdiction, as well as…
Kirk Brincau
18th March 2020
Litigation & Dispute Resolution

Court Decides that Act XXVII of 2018 Balances the Rights of the Owners and Tenants

The article was written by Dr. Kirk Brincau and Dr. Matthew Cutajar.Civil Court, First Hall (Constitutional Jurisdiction), Gerald Camilleri et vs Advocate General et, 31st October 2019Gerald Camilleri and his wife (the 'applicants') purchased a property in Sliema which is regulated under the Housing (Decontrol) Ordinance, Chapter 158 of the Laws of Malta and which is tenanted by third parties having a title of lease by virtue of a previous title of emphyteusis.The applicants initiated proceedings in front of the First Hall, Civil Court (Constitutional Jurisdiction) (the 'Court') claiming that their right to property safeguarded under the Constitution as well…
Kirk Brincau
1st November 2019
Employment & Labour

Court Confirms €90,374.43 Awarded for Unfair Dismissal

The Court of Appeal (Inferior) confirmed the sum of ninety thousand, three hundred and seventy-four euro and forty-three cents (€90,374.43) granted by the Industrial Tribunal following a finding of unfair dismissal in the case of Publius Davison vs De La Rue Currency and Security Print Limited (Appeal nr 160/2018, decided on the 11th of October 2019). The case was filed by Publius Davison (hereinafter referred to as 'the applicant') on the 2nd of July 2008 after he had been dismissed from his employment on the 19th of June 2008.The applicant was a security guard with a salary of thirty thousand,…
Kirk Brincau
30th October 2019
Litigation & Dispute Resolution

Court Considers Public Policy and Public Security Restrictions to Right of Freedom of Movement of EU Nationals

​A European Union national (hereinafter referred to as 'the Appellant') previously convicted and incarcerated for trafficking drugs challenged the decision given under the authority of the Director of Citizenship and Expatriate Affairs (hereinafter referred to as 'the Director') which had effectively limited his right to freedom of movement and required his removal from Malta. This decision had been confirmed by the Immigration Appeals Board that considered that the Director had correctly applied the law. The Appellant contested both these decisions through an appeal filed in front of the Court of Appeal (Inferior Jurisdiction) which was decided on the 16th of…
Kirk Brincau
18th October 2018