The Planning Authority will have to face the music over a recent court decision revoking the controversial db Group City Centre project in Pembroke, as the developers are now claiming that the authority was to be held “directly and solely responsible” for the “serious” prejudice suffered.

This claim was the subject of a judicial protest filed by db San Gorg Property Limited against the Planning Authority, in the aftermath of the judgment, hailed as “huge” by those seeking to halt the €300 million project overlooking St George’s Bay.

Now the developers are claiming that the Planning Authority was “directly and solely” to blame for “failing to safeguard fundamental principles of fair hearing,” thereby giving rise to “particular circumstances” which had led the court to declare the process to have been vitiated.

The developers had been “totally unaware” of those circumstances which had given rise to the lack of a fair, impartial and independent hearing before the Planning Authority Board, resulting in the revocation of the permit by the court.

Such shortcoming by the Planning Authority had spelt a “serious and grave prejudice” for the developers, which translated into a “loss of precious time” in obtaining the necessary approval, “huge damages and great costs,” the protesting party claimed, calling upon the Planning Authority to shoulder the relative liquidation and payment of damages in terms of law.

This judicial act followed in the wake of the judgment delivered on June 19, by a Court of Appeal, presided over by Mr Justice Mark Chetcuti, upholding an application by three local councils, a number of NGOs and residents, declaring that the Planning Authority’s approval of the project was “null and void,” and further revoking the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal’s green-lighting of the project.

The massive development, including a 38-storey tower and 17-storey hotel, bearing “enormous financial repercussions” was not to be treated lightly, the Court had observed, pointing out that there was no room for “any shadow of doubt” especially when the project was one of such proportions.

The presence of Matthew Pace, franchise owner of Remax Alliance Swieqi and a member on the Planning Authority Board, had prompted the appellants to challenge the impartiality of the Board, a challenge upheld by the court.

Mr Pace was in a position of getting a commission through his estate agency when the project had not yet been approved, which approval depended upon his vote as a member of the Planning Board.

This meant that he had “a clear and direct interest” in the vote, which interest he was duty-bound to declare from the start, the Court had concluded, pointing out that there was a potential financial benefit in respect of Mr Pace, “no matter how small that benefit could be.”

Once Mr Pace had not abstained from sitting on the Board when the decision on the project was taken, his lack of impartiality “polluted the decision taken collectively,” the Court had declared, revoking the approval of the project.

The judicial protest by db San Gorg Property Limited was signed by Profs Ian Refalo, Dr Stefano Filletti and Dr Edward Gatt.