Mr Justice Giovanni Grixti has rejected a plea by the State Advocate to revoke his decree to recuse himself from the case filed by Opposition Leader Bernard Grech and PN MP Adrian Delia to force the government to attempt to recoup the millions paid to Steward Healthcare.

In his decree, Mr Justice Grixti deplored the "quite intimidating" tone used by the State advocate in the application that had been filed. 

The Judge had issued a decree last week recusing himself from this case after the judge's partner was appointed curator for the absent company in a separate case. Curators are appointed by rota and act as placeholders for absent parties to a contract.

On 22 January Mr Justice Grixti was expected to deliver judgment as to whether the Prime Minister and his Cabinet could join the case instituted by Bernard Grech and Adrian Delia against the State Advocate as an interested party. The Opposition MPs want the court to order the State Advocate to initiate legal action to recoup the millions of euros paid to Steward Healthcare as part of the hospitals deal. The hospitals deal had been struck down by the courts last year.

The Government had applied to join the case but then on 22 January, the judge announced his decision to recuse himself.

Grixti ruled last week that it was right for him to step away from the case to avoid any conflict of interest despite both parties having expressed trust in him during a sitting earlier this month.

But the State Advocate wanted Judge Giovanni Grixti to withdraw his recusal. In a sworn statement, State Advocate Chris Soler said the judge did not follow the correct procedure thus denying the parties to the case the chance to make submissions. “For a court decree to be legitimate, it has to be procedurally correct… the law requires that a ruling is given before the sitting, the parties are notified and given the opportunity to make their own submissions,” the State Advocate said. Soler asked the court to revoke the recusal decree and follow the procedures laid out at law.

Mr Grixti has now taken a decision and refused to revoke the recusal.

In a decision handed down on Wednesday, Mr Justice Grixti deplored the “quite intimidating’ tone used by the State Advocate in his application, which the judge said was “unfortunately also embraced by the applicants (the government) for the intervention in the case.” The judge said that there was no need for such ferocity in an application like this for the revocation of a decree.

Mr Justice Grixti said that the aim of the decree given in camera was not to stultify proceedings and not to uselessly bring the parties to court on Monday after the developments a week prior.

He said that a judge needs to be cautious enough that his independent position remains untouched not only during the hearing of the case, but even after judgement so that nobody could point their finger, particularly when the issue could end up in an external forum. He noted that he had already accepted to continue hearing the case after it was pointed out that his cousin had drawn up a government report regarding the suitability of the proposals regarding handing over the hospitals to Vitals Global Healthcare, “which is today the subject of the case assigned to this court.” He said that it is not true that a curator’s competence ends with the execution of the act ordered by the court.

The judge ruled that his previous decree recusing himself is in conformity with the laws of Malta, and rejected the State Advocate’s request.