Advertisement

The Court’s decisions to cancel the charges against DF Advocates is irregular and it doesn’t make sense

I’ve asked legal advice and reflected a lot about Wednesday’s Court decision to annul the charges against DF Advocates. The charges were canceled because according to the defense lawyer Franco Debono, DF Advocates is not a registered company or an incorporated entity and thus can not be charged.

This decision is bizarre, irregular and it absolutely doesn’t make sense. There are many problems with this decision.

Firstly, why is Franco Debono being believed on a prima facie basis? Did anyone verify whether DF Advocates are actually registered somewhere else in another country? Why is the Magistrate believing Franco Debono? For God’s sake, he is a criminal lawyer and therefore a professional liar. How and why wasn’t there any police investigator who could confirm this allegation?

Secondly, even if DF Advocates is not a registered or an incorporated entity, it doesn’t mean that it can not be charged. I can also testify from my own experience on this. When I published the student rag “Ir-Realta'”, the rag was not registered anywhere, yet I was still charged as its editor. Just because the rag was not registered, it did not give me impunity from the law.

There is something deeply wrong with this decision and I am very suspicious of it. Constitutionally, it also doesn’t make any sense and I am sure the prosecutors have many ways to address this abnormality.

So far, having followed the case closely with my friends, prosecutors are doing a very good job, and even Prosecutor Francesco Refalo, whom I previously criticized, seems to be on fire. I congratulate him and I hope he keeps up his work in this manner.


Comments

  1. Concerned avatar
    Concerned

    Dear Mark Camilleri,
    Thank you for your interesting stories. However just for clarity, advocates can only register themselves as a partnership. One may only sue persons and these could only be of 2 types: either human or limited liability companies.

    If the charges are against a partnership they will be null because this type of business does not have a separate legal entity and legally, a person does not exist.

    The charges need to be made against the partners themselves who are real persons.

    This is something taught in secondary schools in Business Studies and Accounts and also at University in legal and financial courses.

    1. Tirso avatar

      Not quite right. A Maltese partnership has its own separate legal personality distinct that from its partners and is capable of owning and holding property under any title at law or be sued. When suing a civil partnership, like a law firm, you sue the partners personally and in representation of the firm.

  2. Alfred Debono avatar
    Alfred Debono

    I certainly am not an expert on this matter but from experience a registered partnership is a legal entity with a statute or partnership agreement so it can be sued and as someone else said also the relative partners can be sued Otherwise anyone can. hide behind a partnership

  3. […] by a lawyer specialised in financial crime which explains why the Magistrate was wrong to heed the defendant’s demand to abrogate charges due to the error of the Attorney-General in its charge sheet.? Allegedly, the error was because DF […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *