Driver who hit pedestrian at 110km/hr must be retried for a third time

A driver convicted of mowing down a woman at a zebra crossing while driving at 110km/hr must be retried for a third time, a court of appeal has ruled.

Renald Aquilina, 29, has already been convicted twice of the crime but both those convictions were subsequently ruled null and void due to procedural issues.

The incident dates back to September 2016, when Moira Cauchi was crossing the road on the Gżira seafront just after 8pm.

Aquilina, who was a taxi driver at the time, hit her while driving at speed, flinging her into the air and onto a centre strip. Cauchi spent months in intensive care and never fully recovered from the incident. 

The case against Aquilina was initially decided in April 2023, when a court handed him a one-year jail term suspended for four years taking into account Aquilina’s age and a social inquiry report.

Magistrate Yana Micallef Stafrace, who presided over the initial case, also fined Aquilina €1,200, imposed a treatment order and disqualified him from obtaining a driving licence for three years.

Moira Cauchi (centre) with her husband Peter and daughter Valentina.

That judgment was appealed by both the prosecution and defence, and the sentence was annulled with the case being sent back to court for re-sentencing.

Aquilina then appeared before Magistrate Victor Axiak, who jailed Aquilina for nine months in July 2025 after he entered a guilty plea.

Aquilina was found guilty of reckless, negligent and dangerous driving, causing injuries to Moira Cauchi, and damaging a third-party vehicle. He was also disqualified from holding a driving licence for three years.

The man’s lawyers appealed the judgement.

The Court of Criminal Appeal established that while Aquilina was given time to reconsider his guilty plea, he was not solemnly and formally warned by the court of the legal consequences of entering such a plea.

The court held that the relevant provision in such cases clearly states that the accused has to be warned in a solemn and formal manner about the consequences of a guilty plea. It also cited jurisprudence that established that it is “incumbent” on the court to warn the accused in the most solemn manner about the legal consequences of his reply.

It then ruled that the appealed judgement was null and without effect and ordered that the case resumes before the Court of Magistrates from before the man admitted the charges.

Madam Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera presided of the Court of Criminal Appeal.

Lawyers Franco Debono and Charles Mercieca appeared for the accused.