Man's libel action 'hateful and frivolous'

A libel action filed by a man against his estranged wife was hateful and frivolous and should never have been filed, a court ruled.

It also asked for the man's lawyer to be investigated by the Commission for the Administration of Justice.

The court heard that separation proceedings were pending between James Delmar, who filed the suit I his name and on behalf of his two-year-old daughter, and Charlene Delmar, and that an incident had occurred in August 2008 when Mrs Delmar alleged that her husband had forced himself upon her in an abusive manner.

Mrs Delmar had, after consulting with her lawyer, filed an official complaint against her husband with the police requesting them to take criminal action. 

The lawyer had also written to Mr Delmar to request him not to repeat the facts that had given rise to the complaint.

On his part Mr Delmar filed a lengthy sworn statement - which the court said had been prepared for him by someone else - in which he declared that his estranged wife had made false and defamatory accusations against him.  But Mr Delmar had been unable to produce documents he claimed had been falsified.

He also complained about the two letters sent by Mrs Delmar's lawyer, even though these letters had not been mentioned in his statement.

In its judgment the court ruled that Mr Delmar had had absolutely no reason to file the libel action on behalf of his daughter, for it did not result that she had been libelled.

The court added that the law considered as privileged the publication of judicial proceedings. 

Mrs Delmar's letter to the police, in which she asked for criminal proceedings to be instituted against her husband, was to be considered privileged, for it was the first necessary step for such proceedings to be filed.

Magistrate Depasquale ruled that Mr Delmar's libel action was hateful and frivolous and ought not to have been filed for he had chosen to involve his young child in a fight between him and his wife.

No one was entitled to abuse of libel proceedings to pressure an adversary in other court proceedings.

This abuse was to be condemned and penalised because it had led to the court's precious time being wasted by feelings of hurt pride which were encouraged by Mr Delmar's lawyer.

The court, therefore, dismissed Mr Delmar's action and ordered him to pay all the costs of the litigation

It also imposed an additional fine of €700 on Mr Delmar and referred the matter to the Commission for the Administration of Justice so that Mr Delmar's lawyer, Emy Bezzina, could be investigated for filing the proceedings.

Lawyer Michael Tanti Dougall assisted Mrs Delmar.