A proposal to set up a small claims tribunal to decide on minor disputes between landlords and tenants has fuelled disagreement over who should appoint members of the panel. 

While the government wants the President to be vested with such power, the Opposition is warning that this would “preempt” the planned talks on the constitutional reform which will delve into the future role of the Head of State. 

The disagreement came to light during a parliamentary debate at committee stage on the Residential Leases Act, whereby each clause is scrutinised and voted upon. 

The Bill, which has been in the pipeline for years, aims to regulate the private rental market, and the government plans to have the law in force from the start of next year. 

One of the major provisions is to oblige landlords and tenants to register rental agreements with the Housing Authority to avoid overnight price hikes and give more stability. 

Parliamentary Secretary for Accommodation Roderick Galdes, who is piloting the Bill, said the “adjudicating panel for private residential  leases” would only preside over claims not exceeding damages of €5,000. 

These included disputes such as damaged or malfunctioning appliances, minor structural repairs or disagreements over utility bills. More often than not such issues require  a speedy solution, and consequently the aggrieved party would be reluctant to go to court due to the length proceedings and the expenses involved. 

During the debate, it emerged that the government had originally proposed the panel should be appointed by the minister. However,  in view of the Opposition’s objections that it could undermine its independence, the clause was amended so that this would be appointed by the President. 

Opposition  leader Adrian  Delia who attended the debate said he had nothing against the proposal as long as it would not delve into more serious disputes, which he said should be left to the courts. 

However, he expressed reservations on having the President appointing the panel’s members. Dr Delia’s concerns stemmed from the fact that this would “pre-empt” matters related to the constitutional convention – the term used for the forthcoming talks on the constitutional reform, including the possibility of revising the largely existing ceremonial powers of the Head of State. 

Following  various exchanges  it was decided to put the issue on hold and debate it in more detail in the next meeting. 

Another clause under the spotlight, on which the Opposition abstained, was a provision dealing with instances whereby landlords would fail to conform with their obligation to register an existing rental agreement in writing. In such case, the Housing Authority could oblige the lessor to conform for a minimum period of one year at a rate not exceeding 75 per cent of the rental value of the tenement.  

Dr Delia said the nature of the sanction to be imposed in cases of a breach should be left to the discretion of the courts.