A man has filed an application before the First Hall of the Civil Court in its constitutional jurisdiction, claiming that the law regulating the composition of the Small Claims Tribunal is anti-constitutional since, by allowing its adjudicator to be a practicing lawyer, it did not guarantee an independent and impartial tool for the administration of justice.

But in his reply, the Attorney General said that the man’s claim was unfounded, adding that the adjudicators, just like members of the judiciary, are bound by an oath of office guaranteeing impartiality.

In his application, Charles Cefai explained that in March this year, his wife Rose and son Josef were the defendants in a case filed against them by Joseph Portelli before the Small Claims Tribunal in the Gozo Law Courts.

In a nutshell, the case was about Lm190.50 that Mr Portelli claimed he is owed in respect of damage sustained by his car during a traffic accident.

The adjudicator who presided over their case ruled that they were responsible for causing the damage and ordered them to pay Mr Portelli the sum requested.

Mr Cefai said the adjudicator was a lawyer who practiced his profession in Gozo. He is claiming that Chapter 380 of the Laws of Malta, which regulates the composition of the Small Claims Tribunal, was anti-constitutional because it did not disqualify a practicing lawyer which could, possibly, affect the impartiality of his decisions.

In his reply, the Attorney General said Mr Cefai’s claims were unfounded, firstly because he had no direct juridical interest in the matter. In addition to this, he said, Chapter 380 does not permit an adjudicator to have a personal or professional interest in the case over which he is presiding and eventually decides.

The Attorney General said Mr Cefai had no grounds for complaining about a lack of impartiality in a case he had lost and called on the court to reject the application.

Dr Franco Debono and Dr Marion Camilleri are appearing for Mr Cefai.