ST Microelectronics yesterday filed a counter protest against Bethany Cassar and Claude Frendo, heirs of their late child Kyle Christian Frendo, saying that the factory where Ms Cassar was employed, never used melamine.

The Cassar and Frendo couple filed a judicial protest last week holding the company responsible for their child’s death after the mother was in constant contact with melamine during the first three months of her pregnancy.

The company, represented by Dr John Buttigieg, said it used cleaning sheets and cleaning compound in the form of pellets, which did not contain melamine. However, the cleaning compound did contain melamine resin, which had completely different chemical properties from those of melamine. Such sheets and cleaning compound have been used for several years in electronics factories around the world, including Europe and the Unites States, to clean machines. It explained that the product manufacturers are obliged to issue the “Material Safety Data Sheet”, which gives information on the substance and whether it is hazardous. This data sheet did not indicate that the product the factory used could be dangerous to Ms Cassar’s foetus.

The company added that its Kirkop factory, including the moulding section where Ms Cassar worked, was certified as conformable with the company’s legal obligations as per the criteria OHSAS 18001, an international occupational health and safety management system specification issued by Bureau Veritas, a notable certification entity.

The company complained that on 28 December, Ms Cassar had written on the website http:forums.wrongdiagnosis.com/showhead.php?t=36737 that her child had died of polycystic kidney disease and doctors at the Special Care Baby Unit at Mater Dei Hospital thought that the baby had Potter’s Syndrome, two conditions which were hereditary and of a genetic nature. She had added that there was a big chance that all of her pregnancies would have the same problem and so she could not have children.

Furthermore, when Ms Cassar was on prolonged sick leave, her family had asked the company to employ her on a reduced hours basis, since there was a chance of her losing the baby due to a genetic problem.

The company thus asserted that there was no connection between the loss of the child and the cleaning sheets and compound used at the factory, consequently, it was not responsible for the newborn’s death. Notwithstanding, Ms Cassar and her partner had not presented medical evidence before the court to prove their allegations.

The counter-protestant went on to say that it had been strongly benevolent with Ms Cassar since it upheld her family’s call to let her work on a reduced hours basis, gave her a concession of additional sick leave after she had consumed all her leave, and gave all possible assistance to accommodate her so much so that she had changed her job four times in a year.

The allegations presented to court and those published on sections of the media were false, defamatory and libellous and the company was reserving its right to take judicial action since the mentioned allegations caused great financial damage to the image and fame of the company.

Thus it called for the couple to refrain from continuing to defame it and held them responsible for damages.