Updated 9.55am with NGO statement

A group of objectors that lost a legal battle to block db Group from developing the former ITS site at St George’s Bay are seeking to have the case retried.

The objectors, which include Pembroke, St Julian's and Swieqi local councils, nine NGOs and 10 individuals, argue that Chief Justice Mark Chetcuti applied the wrong law when he quashed their appeal against the project last May.

That decision effectively paved the way for db Group to forge ahead with its plans to develop the former Institute of Tourism Studies site into a complex featuring two residential towers and a hotel block.

Both sides do not even agree on the height of the proposed buildings: while the company says it will be building 17, 16 and 12-storey structures, objectors say that when counting the ground floor and mezzanine levels the buildings will be 19, 17 and 13-storey ones. 

Despite May's court verdict, objectors have refused to take that defeat lying down. In a legal filing dated August 29 and signed by lawyer Claire Bonello, the group asked the court to strike off that sentence and rule on it afresh.

Rumours of a planned legal filing first surfaced earlier this week.

Their dramatic legal bid drew a combative response from db Group.

When contacted for comment, a spokesperson for the company told Times of Malta that they believe objectors are being spurred on by rival developers.

“This litigation confirms what level-headed people knew all along. Opposition to the project was for the most part covertly driven by competitors who fear our Group’s ability to make a success of all its investments,” a spokesperson said.

The company was now looking into ways of seeking damages to protect its interests, the spokesperson added.

A spokesperson representing one of the objectors, Moviment Graffitti, dismissed those claims as intimidatory. 

"Sustained malicious allegations and attacks by the developers destroying our country and by those pigging out at the people’s expense will not intimidate us into limiting our actions to fight them, including the use of legal actions," the Graffitti representative said. 

What objectors are arguing

In its decision last May, the Court of Appeal presided by Chetcuti ruled that the issue concerned planning issues addressed by the PA’s appeals tribunal, the EPRT, rather than points of law.

The court had said that while objectors were right to argue that the EPRT had incorrectly classified the Hotel Height Limitation Adjustment Policy and Floor-to-Area Policy as “subject plans” for the project, the appeal was not based on that premise.

Objectors have taken issue with that reasoning.

Chief among their arguments is that the Court of Appeal failed to take into consideration Article 52 of the Development Planning Act, which sets the order of precedence of plans and policies, should these come into conflict.

That article makes it clear that local plans should take precedence over specific planning policies such as those governing the height of hotels or floor-to-area ratios, objectors argue.

Objectors argued that the Court of Appeal’s reasoning that their appeal was not “based on that premise” did not stand, as an entire section of their appeal had focused on that issue.

They also submit that local plans for the area state that hotels must respect all local plan policies, including those concerning building heights which state that buildings in the area should not rise above four storeys and a semi-basement level.

Objectors’ legal filing also argues that the court was mistaken when it concluded that the appeal concerned planning issues, rather than legal ones. Decisions concerning which plans and policies are to be applied when they are in conflict are legal issues, they argue, and are therefore part of the court’s remit.

Db Group hits back

The company behind the project, DB Group, believes the move to seek a retrial is destined to fail and described the move as being based on "spurious, non-existent, and vexatious grounds."

“We have absolutely no doubt that the Courts will resoundingly defeat this bizarre litigation,” a company spokesperson said.

But it also made a more serious allegation: that its competitors have been fuelling objections to the project.

“We accepted all the reasonable suggested changes [to the project],” the spokesperson said, noting that the current proposal was significantly downsized from its original plans. 

"Yet it made no difference to those who opposed our project solely because it is ours.

“Now it is blindingly obvious why. Their goal was not to improve the project but to abort it at all costs. Why did the people promoting this new litigation remain eerily silent, or almost, about bigger and higher projects, even a stone’s throw from ours, and built on land bought or leased at cheaper prices than ours? Again, simple. Because that’s what was in the interest of our Group’s competitors.”

The company did not provide any evidence to substantiate its allegations. 

The allegation echoes a similar one made by construction mogul and developers’ lobby chief Michael Stivala in a Times of Malta interview earlier this year.

Stivala had alleged that some NGO-led campaigns against development projects are bankrolled by rival developers who are hoping to derail projects.

The claim drew a storm of criticism from civil society groups and prompted NGO Commissioner Jesmond Saliba to launch a probe. Saliba has yet to announce any findings from that investigation.

Graffitti: 'We are using legitimate means to stop greed' 

In a statement, Moviment Graffitti spokesperson Andre Callus said they had been working for six years to "stop db's monstrosity on public land: land for which they paid peanuts and from which they will rake in hundreds of millions from the sale of real estate." 

Callus said objectors were using regular legal channels to mount their claim and pledged to maintain their commitment to residents and the public to "stop db’s shameless greed."

"There’s a lot at stake here. db wants to build two 19- and 18-storey towers and a 13-storey hotel, on public land in Pembroke, in a residential area and with disastrous impacts on important historical sites and areas of great natural sensitivity. 

"The fact that we have seen communities organising themselves against such obscenity is something that gave a lot of courage to NGOs and to all people around Malta and Gozo. Sustained malicious allegations and attacks by the developers destroying our country and by those pigging out at the people’s expense will not intimidate us into limiting our actions to fight them, including the use of legal actions," Callus said.