Appeal court upholds Polish judgment on maintenance

The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal filed by Andrew Ciantar from a judgment of the First Hall of the Civil Court and ruled that a judgment delivered on October 22, 2004, by a Polish court was to be recognised and enforced in Malta.

The court heard that in March 2005, Elwira Maria Opatecka had filed an application before the First Hall of the Civil Court.

She claimed that the Polish judgment had ordered Mr Ciantar to pay her, as his wife, maintenance in the sum of Lm154 per month for the period from March 2000 to September 2003.

Applicant claimed that her husband had not paid her this money, and she requested the court to recognise the judgment as she was a Polish national and therefore an EU citizen, and to declare it to be enforceable in Malta.

On his part Mr Ciantar declared that he was surprised to learn of this judgment, for it had been delivered in October 2004 while he and his wife had already separated by deed of separation as authorised by the courts in October 2003.

He therefore claimed that his separation was conclusive and that the Polish court was aware of the separation and had been provided with a copy of the deed.

In June 2005 the First Hall of the Civil Court upheld Ms Opatecka's application and declared that the judgment was enforceable in Malta. Mr Ciantar appealed to the Court of Appeal composed of Chief Justice Vincent Degaetano, Mr Justice Anton Depasquale and Mr Justice Albert J Magri.

Mr Ciantar submitted that the Polish judgment contradicted another judgment dealing with the parties which had been delivered in Malta.

According to Mr Ciantar, the contract of personal separation entered into between him and his wife had taken place after it had been authorised by the court.

As a result, the contract of personal separation was to be deemed as a judgment which had been delivered before the Polish judgment.

However, this argument was dismissed by the First Hall of the Civil Court and by the Court of Appeal.

While it was true that in Maltese law both a judgment and a contract constituted an executive title which could be enforced, the law distinguished between judgments and contracts.

Furthermore, the EU legislation on the recognition and enforcement of judgments did not include public deeds, such as a contract of separation, within its definition of "judgment", even if such deeds were published after a court decree.

The court therefore dismissed Mr Ciantar's appeal and confirmed the judgment of the first court.