Lm7,076 damages award after shooting incident

A man injured in a shooting incident was yesterday awarded Lm7,076 damages by Mr Justice Noel Cuschieri in the Civil Court for a four per cent permanent disability.

Norbert Farrugia was awarded damages after the court ruled that John Farrugia had shot him during an argument with another man in an incident that had neither been provoked nor could be said to constitute self-defence.

Mr Justice Cuschieri heard Norbert Farrugia's writ against John and Pawla Farrugia.

Norbert Farrugia claimed he had sustained a permanent injury when John Farrugia had wounded him with a shotgun in Siggiewi on October 23, 1994.

But the Farrugia couple pleaded they were not responsible for the incident because it had been caused by the actions of a Francis Aquilina.

They further pleaded that Pawla Farrugia could not be held responsible for any damages as she had not been present when the incident occurred.

Mr Justice Cuschieri heard how Norbert Farrugia had been asleep inside his house on October 23, 1994, when he heard a noise outside.

He looked out and saw that a car, driven by Francis Aquilina, had collided with a parked car. Farrugia helped Aquilina out of the car and sat him down on a chair.

Some 15 minutes later, John Farrugia's children, Michael and Nicholas, arrived on the scene, swearing and challenging Aquilina to fight.

On his part, Aquilina was willing to fight but Norbert Farrugia managed to hold him back and calm him down.

However, John Farrugia turned up with a shotgun, also swearing and shouting.

As Norbert Farrugia faced Aquilina in a bid to restrain him and calm him down, John Farrugia fired the shotgun and wounded him in the right arm.

Norbert Farrugia told the court he heard one of John Farrugia's sons urging his father to shoot him again because he had interfered.

Mr Justice Cuschieri also heard that, shortly before the incident, Aquilina had punched John Farrugia and Farrugia had managed to get away and reach his house.

John Farrugia's two sons had meanwhile gone in search of Aquilina and found him outside Norbert Farrugia's house.

Mr Justice Cuschieri noted that the defendant had not denied firing the shotgun.

On the contrary, John Farrugia had testified that he had fired the gun to frighten the other parties and had hit Norbert Farrugia while his back was turned.

It was clear, the judge said, that John Farrugia had not exercised the prudence required of him at law by firing his gun in a public road in the vicinity of third parties.

The court dismissed defendant's plea that the incident had been provoked by Aquilina because some time had lapsed between the punching incident and the shooting.

Neither could this be considered a case of self-defence.

The court however upheld the plea filed by Pawla Farrugia and held that she could not be held responsible in damages as she had not been present when the incident occurred and was in no manner involved in it.