MaltaPost was yesterday ordered by Mr Justice Joseph Zammit McKeon in the First Hall of the Civil Court to pay a former employee €15,817 which the court found was due to him as half the salary he was not paid while he was involved in a court case, in which he was eventually acquitted.

Rueben Scicluna had started legal action against the company because although he was acquitted, the company still refused to pay the half salary that had been withheld for the period April, 2001 to December, 2003.

Mr Scicluna was employed as a postman with the government in September, 1990 and in November eight years later was promoted to senior postperson. On privatisation of the postal service, postal employees were given the choice of remaining in the public service, or getting a permanent job with MaltaPost. In April, 2001 Mr Scicluna was arraigned with others in connection with drug offences.

Mr Scicluna was accused of collecting from the post a packet of drugs for someone who was being investigated by the police. On his arraignment, he was suspended from work and, as laid down in the collective agreement, he started being paid half his salary.

In 2003, MaltaPost introduced a restructuring exercise which led to a reduction in the number of employees and those employees who used to work with the government were given the choice of returning to government employment on the salary they were earning at MaltaPost.

Mr Scicluna decided in December, 2003 to return to government employment but because his case was still pending, he still earned only half his salary. When in March, 2008 he was acquitted, the government paid the half salary that had been withheld.

MaltaPost however did not pay the salary it had withheld for the period April, 2001 to December, 2003, and Mr Scicluna sued. The government argued it was not bound to pay any of the salary that had been withheld for the period in question because during that period he was not a government employee. On its part, MaltaPost argued that the time in which Mr Scicluna could claim the salary withheld had lapsed.

Mr Justice Zammit McKeon ruled that there was nothing to prevent MaltaPost to take disciplinary action against Mr Scicluna when he was arraigned in court. But now it could not claim that the government’s decision after the acquittal had prejudiced its interests.