Updated 3.56pm with court reasoning

The db Group’s City Centre towers will rise at the old ITS site in St George’s Bay, after a court threw out an appeal against the project filed by objectors.

Chief Justice Mark Chetcuti quashed the appeal in a verdict delivered on Wednesday morning. The decision means a Planning Authority permit granted to the db Group project stands.

The decision ends a years-long legal battle against the project and has been met with dismay and disappointment by Pembroke residents and environmental NGOs.

Db Group now have the legal go-ahead to proceed with works to excavate the site and develop three towers at the site, rising 17, 16 and 12 floors respectively. The project will include high-end apartments, retail and commercial space and a hotel.

A company spokesperson said they were relieved by the decision.

"Db Group welcomes today's court verdict which brings an end to eight years of scrutiny by various courts, tribunals and authorities. This has been one of the most scrutinised projects in local history, and the truth has finally prevailed. We now look forward to delivering this world-class project," the spokesperson said. 

Objectors said they were disappointed by the decision but would be exploring other avenues to challenge the project. 

"It is clear that this was yet another case of bowing to big businesses and allowing them to make a profit at the expense of the community at large,” Moviment Graffitti activist Andre Callus said.  

Appeal was based on planning issues: court

The court concluded that the appeal was based on planning issues, rather than points of law.

While objectors were right to argue that the PA’s appeals tribunal, the EPRT, had incorrectly classified the Hotel Height Limitation Adjustment Policy and Floor-to-Area Policy, the appeal was not based on that premise, the court said.

If a development did not create an adverse impact on the zone, if its size was consistent with height limitation and character of the area in line with the local plan, and if it would not affect present and future traffic management proposals, was there a lack of adherence to the local plan?

The court concluded that those were not points of law but planning issues which had been addressed by the Tribunal.

So the court could not decide on matters beyond its powers (ultra vires) and therefore rejected the appeal.

Lawyers Stefano Filletti and Ian Stafrace represented db Group in the case.

A controversial project

Originally, db Group had planned to build a massive 37-storey tower and 17-storey hotel at the site. The Planning Authority approved those plans in 2018, having hired a private jet to fly in a board member specifically for the vote. The member in question voted in favour.

The original plans proposed a massive 37-storey tower at the site.

Objectors continued to battle against the permit and in 2019 a court revoked the permit after it was revealed that another PA board member who voted in favour of the project, Matthew Pace, stood to financially benefit from that decision through a real estate agency he owned.

Db Group then revised its plans to downscale the project and resubmitted a planning application, which the PA granted in 2021 by a narrow 4-3 margin.

Objectors sought to overturn that decision at the Environment and Planning Tribunal (EPRT). When they were unsuccessful, they turned to the law courts. But on Wednesday, that legal avenue ran into a dead end.

Court highlights EPRT clause

One of the issues flagged by the appellants was the fact that the project would likely generate so much traffic that a tunnel, the longest one in Malta, was planned to mitigate it.

The EPRT had also taken note of a second tunnel which, though not related to the project, would also alleviate traffic in the area. 

In a very detailed technical decision, the tribunal had noted that the db Group project depended on such infrastructural projects being carried out – something outside the Planning Authority’s remit. 

To mitigate that, the tribunal ordered that no part of the db Group project was to be rendered operational before Transport Malta confirmed that the necessary, adequate infrastructure was in place, as indicated in the Transport Impact Assessment.

In its decision, the court of appeal confirmed the tribunal’s reasoning, saying it was very detailed and technical. There was no legal point to be dealt with by the court, it said.