Energy regulator loses legal battle over storm damage compensation

The Regulator for Energy and Water Services (REWS) has failed in its bid to get a court to revoke an executive garnishee order issued by the court after its predecessor, the Malta Resources Authority, was held responsible for part of the damages sustained by P.O.G. Limited and Petralux Limited.

The two companies whose Qormi properties were severely damaged by flooding during a storm that caused havoc across the Maltese islands 22 years ago were awarded €427,303.61 in damages by the Court of Appeal in November 2024.

P.O.G. Limited and Petralux Limited had filed for damages against several government departments and entities, including the Qormi local council, after a storm struck Malta between 15 and 17 September 2003.

Their properties included the Drugshop Dispensary and adjacent clinics at Triq Spiteri Fremond on De La Cruz Avenue in Qormi.

The storm had caused severe flooding in several locations resulting in an overflow of sewage and significant damage to the claimants' property.

After the regulator failed to pay up its portion of the damages, the companies requested the court to issue a garnishee order to enforce an executive title it obtained once the November 2024 judgement was handed down.

REWS then sought to impugn the executive act.

The First Hall of the Civil Court turned down REWS’s attempt to lift the garnishee order and denied a request by the regulator for the judge hearing the case to abstain, after the latter informed the parties that he had formed part of the composition of the Court of Appeal that handed down the judgement in November 2024.

The court of first instance denied the requests put forward by REWS, which then sought to appeal the decree, requesting the Court of Appeal to revoke it and send the case back to the court of first instance and be heard by a different judge.

In its appeal, REWS argued that the judge should have abstained and that it was not the successor of the Malta Resource Authority. It further argued that it could not be bound by a judgment in which it was not involved for nine years.

The companies countered that this was an attempt to prolong the proceedings further, noting that the garnishee order was issued on the basis of different court proceedings that had established responsibilities. They also highlighted that under law, the regulator could not appeal the decision of recusal.

 Moreover, they highlighted that one cannot appeal from a judgement handed down by the Court of Appeal in which the regulator was allocated 25 percent of the responsibility.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the grievance relating to the recusal of the judge.It also noted that the court of first instance was correct in ruling that REWS succeeded the Malta Resource Authority.

It also observed that the merits of the case had been decided in November 2024 and the matter had been judged.

The judgment also constituted an executive title that the companies could enforce to get paid.

The court concluded that REWS had an obligation to pay up the damages since the competences of the Malta Resources Authority had been transferred to it by law. It denied the appeal by the regulator and ordered REWS to pay the court expenses.

The Court of Appeal was composed of Acting President Mr Justice Lawrence Mintoff, Madam Justice Miriam Hayman and Mr Justice Francesco Depasquale.

Lawyers Hugh Peralta and Robert Vella Baldacchino appeared for P.O.G. Ltd and Petralux Ltd.Lawyer Pawlu Lia appeared for REWS.