According to this judgement, the Maltese legal system by which a judge who presides over a re-trial when this judge has previously decided on the merits of a case, infringed article six of the convention.

This judgement is the first one handed down against Malta since the European Court, based in Strasbourg, was re-organised seven years ago and the second since Malta became a signatory to the convention in the 1960s.

The case against the Maltese government was filed by the San Leonard Band Club. The club had originally filed a lawsuit against the Housing Secretary in December 1986 over land in Kirkop.

The case went to appeal and all the possible court cases were opened, including a Constitutional case.

The European Court of Human Rights noted that, according to Maltese law, the new trial should be heard by the same court which had pronounced the judgement complained of, and the same judges or magistrates may sit on this appeals court.

In its judgement the European court said that this situation could raise doubts in the applicant’s mind about the impartiality of the Court of Appeal.

However, it continued, the decision on whether these doubts are objectively justified had to be taken according to the circumstances of the case.

In the case in question, the court said, the same judges were called upon to decide whether or not they had committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision. In other words, they were requested to judge themselves and their ability to apply the law.

These circumstances, the European Court said, are sufficient to justify the applicant’s fears about the lack of impartiality of the Court of Appeal and this was in breach of article six of the Convention of Human Rights.

In a statement, lawyers Jose Herrera and Edward Zammit Lewis, who represented the band club in Strasbourg, said they were considering the legal steps that could be taken to rectify the injustice suffered by their client.

They said that after this judgement, the law will have to be amended.

According to this judgement, the Maltese legal system by which a judge who presides over a re-trial when this judge has previously decided on the merits of a case, infringed article six of the convention.

This judgement is the first one handed down against Malta since the European Court, based in Strasbourg, was re-organised seven years ago and the second since Malta became a signatory to the convention in the 1960s.

The case against the Maltese government was filed by the San Leonard Band Club. The club had originally filed a lawsuit against the Housing Secretary in December 1986 over land in Kirkop.

The case went to appeal and all the possible court cases were opened, including a Constitutional case.

The European Court of Human Rights noted that, according to Maltese law, the new trial should be heard by the same court which had pronounced the judgement complained of, and the same judges or magistrates may sit on this appeals court.

In its judgement the European court said that this situation could raise doubts in the applicant’s mind about the impartiality of the Court of Appeal.

However, it continued, the decision on whether these doubts are objectively justified had to be taken according to the circumstances of the case.

In the case in question, the court said, the same judges were called upon to decide whether or not they had committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision. In other words, they were requested to judge themselves and their ability to apply the law.

These circumstances, the European Court said, are sufficient to justify the applicant’s fears about the lack of impartiality of the Court of Appeal and this was in breach of article six of the Convention of Human Rights.

In a statement, lawyers Jose Herrera and Edward Zammit Lewis, who represented the band club in Strasbourg, said they were considering the legal steps that could be taken to rectify the injustice suffered by their client.

They said that after this judgement, the law will have to be amended.