The aftermath of the De Paule Band Club case : has the importance of court decisions and the rule of law been undermined?

Abstract

This work aims to provide an analysis of the aftermath of the De Paule Band Club case, where the owners obtained a judgement that ordered the eviction of the tenants from their property. Later on, the Civil Code was amended by Act XXVII of 2018, which introduced additional restrictions to band club leases, allowing for the possibility of lease extensions, even when a Court judgement orders an eviction for a reason other than the failure to pay rent due. Its enactment has caused controversy and the dissertation examines whether the amendment is undermining the importance of court judgements and the rule of law. To determine this, the dissertation examines the importance of legal certainty in the right to a fair trial, which allows citizens to foresee their legal position in their respective case. It explores judgements delivered by the Maltese Courts and the ECtHR, that highlight the ECHR’s recognition of legal certainty as a vital requirement that protects such right. A crucial part of the dissertation focuses on the concept of judgements res judicata and its essentiality towards legal certainty. By asking whether the Government can enact a law that renders final judgements ineffective, the dissertation further analyses ECtHR judgements, Maltese judgements and textbooks that explain this concept and its significance in preserving the rule of law. Another chapter is dedicated to the consequences of a Constitutional case, if decided in favour or against the owners of the property. It examines their claims that the Act breaches their right to a fair trial, right to property, right to an effective remedy and right not to be discriminated, while also analysing the defences to such claims. All of this culminates in the conclusion that the Act not only creates a dangerous precedent of judicial interference, but also breaches said human rights.