The government has objected to a request by Steward Healthcare to present new documents as part of its appeal against a court decision to annul its hospitals concessions agreement.

The civil court struck down the deal in February after concluding that it was fraudulent. It ordered Steward to hand back the management of Gozo General Hospital, St Luke's Hospital and Karin Grech Hospital to the government within three months.

Steward subsequently appealed, although it subsequently gave notice that it was terminating the concession agreement, due to "non-rectifiable defaults on the part of the government of Malta".

Some days later, the government announced that it would be assuming control of the three hospitals immediately, citing a "control step-in" provision in the original agreements. 

The court case that led to the deals being annulled was instituted by Nationalist MP Adrian Delia, with the government appearing as a defendant alongside Steward.

The government, which did not appeal the decision, said on Tuesday that it had filed an application asking the courts to hear the appeal with urgency in the national interest.

It added that it was objecting to a Steward request to present new evidence and documents. Should the court allow Steward to present such new evidence and documents, the government said it reserved the right to reply by seeking to present other documents which had not been available or did not exist, before the first judgement was delivered. 

The government said it is also objecting to a request by Steward for the Superior civil appeals court to refer the case to the European Court of Justice.

Steward is arguing that it only agreed to take on the Maltese concession in the way it did because of assurances by the Maltese government that the contract would be renegotiated to make it "bankable". 

It says the government reneged on that promise and has said it will present documentation to that effect as part of its appeal. 

The company has also said that it will be asking the court to refer the case to the ECJ, saying it believes the decision to annul the deal violates rule of law principles.