Encouraging parties in a court dispute to reach an agreement and lawyers to pay for “the privilege of holding a licence” to practise their profession would help improve a justice system bogged down by “shortcomings accumulated over decades”, Mr Justice Henri Mizzi said.

During his inaugural speech on Thursday, the new judge shifted the focus away from the usual criticism about the “chronic” lack of resources hampering the efficient handling of court cases, providing instead a fresh outlook on what can effectively be done to shake up the system.

Criticism about the lack of staff and space in court was generally directed at the government and when the judiciary complained they did not do so “capriciously”, started off the newly-appointed judge, adding that the work and investment by the government in this sector was acknowledged.

However, the present-day system was the result of “shortcomings accumulated over the decades” and improving it was a task that could not fall solely upon the government but the judiciary as well as lawyers also had a duty to contribute.

The trial and pre-trial system adopted within our legal framework is acknowledged on an international level as “gold standard procedure”.

It is the system adopted in international arbitration procedures and also in England and one personally experienced by Mizzi who, since 2020, had moved away from private practice to take up the role of arbitrator, presiding over mediation proceedings.

The system called for “organisation and discipline both by the judiciary as well as lawyers”.

Encouraging parties in a lawsuit to come to an agreement would not only contribute towards a more efficient and organised justice system but also often delivers the fairest result.

Full disclosure of evidence from the very start of litigation rather than adopting a piecemeal approach or springing surprises on the other parties as the case progresses would also allow for more efficient and organised handling of cases.

Over the past 30 years, the number of lawyers has increased immensely but “regulation, organisation and the mentality have not kept up the pace with the times”.

A radical change is needed in the structure of the committee regulating the profession and that calls for legal amendments.

Law just piece of writing unless preceded by impact study

But, in this country, we tend to think that amending the law will solve the problem, “like some magical wand”.

The law is nothing but a useless piece of writing unless preceded by an impact study as well as a well-thought plan on how that law is to be implemented.

Taking a leaf from the commercial sector, Mizzi said that lawyers would manifest “a great sense of civic responsibility” if they were to contribute financially towards the regulation and organisation of their own profession.

“This should come as no surprise,” remarked the judge, observing that individuals who held some sort of business licence had to pay for it and their contributions were used, directly or indirectly, towards regulating that sector.

“Lawyers ought to be no different.”

They ought to contribute an annual fee “for the privilege of holding a licence to practise their profession”.

The new judge, who will preside over commercial disputes, got “quite a shock” when assigned some 450 civil cases by the chief justice.

“However, am I to hear and decide all those cases in a reasonable time,” was his immediate concern.

Statistics showed that whereas in England, Italy, America, Germany and France the average caseload for a judge was around 100, in Malta every judge presiding over the First Hall, Civil Court handled 450 to 500 cases.

Based on a 50-hour working week, that meant that, for every case, the judge could allocate four hours annually. Obviously, the majority of cases needed much more than that. No wonder Malta did not score well in the 2023 European Commission’s justice study, he said.