The Constitutional Court has dismissed a challenge brought by the Malta Association for Professional Engineers (MAPE) against legislative reforms to the engineering profession.

The judgment confirmed the validity of amendments made to the Engineering Profession Act and upheld an earlier 2025 judgment delivered by the First Hall of the Civil Court.

The legislative amendments were introduced following infringement proceedings initiated in June 2015 by the European Commission against Malta.

The Commission argued that Malta showed a "lack of compliance with the Services Directive in the area of regulated professions". The EU Services Directive seeks to ensure the free movement of services within the European Union.

In response, the Maltese government began revising the Engineering Profession Act among other acts to align the country's regulatory system with EU law.

Between 2017 and 2019, the Engineering Profession Board worked with the Transport Ministry to draft amendments in consultation with the Chamber of Engineers.

In July 2019, the Malta Association for Professional Engineers was established to represent engineers' professional interests.

In November 2019, the board shared a draft version of the proposed amendments with MAPE for feedback. According to the board, these documents were confidential and intended for consultation purposes only.

However, the board later alleged that MAPE leaked the draft proposals on social media.

Tensions escalated in October 2020, when MAPE filed a an injunction against the board and its individual members in an attempt to stop them from presenting or promoting the legislative amendments to parliament. The association argued that the profession had not been adequately consulted.

The court granted the injunction in November 2020, but limited it strictly to the board and the individuals named in the application.

Despite the injunction, the legislative process continued.

Between March and July 2021, the amendments were introduced in parliament by then-Transport Minister Ian Borg.

MAPE declined to participate in parliamentary committee discussions on the bill, maintaining that the matter should be resolved in court.

Parliament ultimately approved the amendments. Following the adoption of the law, the European Commission closed its infringement proceedings against Malta in December 2021.

Arguments before the court

MAPE challenged the legislation on two principal grounds.

First, the association argued that the injunction issued against the Engineering Profession Board effectively prevented the legislative process from continuing. According to the association, the minister and parliament should therefore have been barred from proceeding with the reforms.

Second, MAPE claimed that the law violated the Proportionality Test. That legislation requires governments to conduct public consultation before introducing measures that restrict access to regulated professions.

MAPE argued that the amendments effectively "degraded" the profession by making it easier for individuals who were not traditionally recognised within the profession to obtain engineering warrants.

Court rejects both arguments

The Constitutional Court rejected both claims.

On the issue of the injunction, the court held that judicial orders only bind the parties specifically named in them. The warrant had been issued solely against the Engineering Profession Board and did not extend to the minister or to parliament.

The judges also noted that the board had already completed its principal task, which was to submit the draft legislative proposals to the European Union, before the injunction was formally issued.

The court further emphasised the constitutional principle of separation of powers. The court noted that while government ministries may consult regulatory bodies, legislative authority ultimately resides with parliament.

In its reasoning, the court said the minister was not acting as a delegate of the board and was therefore entitled to proceed with the legislative process in the national interest.

Consultation requirement not triggered

The court also rejected the claim that the reforms breached the Proportionality Test Act.

According to the judgment, the consultation obligation established by that law applies only when legislation restricts access to a profession.

In this case, the amendments were found to do the opposite.

Among other changes, the law introduced the concept of "legal persons", allowing companies to provide engineering services, and facilitated the recognition of professional qualifications obtained in other EU member states.

As a result, the reforms were deemed to increase access to the engineering profession rather than restrict it.

Admission during testimony

During cross-examination, Ciantar himself acknowledged that the reforms expanded access to the profession, though he argued that "several loopholes" had been included in the wording of the law, that are "dangerous" to the profession due to the granting of warrants to unqualified third country workers.

The court noted that this admission effectively confirmed that the threshold required to trigger the consultation obligation had not been met.

The Constitutional Court concluded that the legislative process complied with all relevant constitutional and statutory requirements.

The appeal was dismissed in its entirety, and MAPE was ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings.