Disciplinary action at Drydocks declared null and void

The First Hall of the Civil Court yesterday annulled disciplinary proceedings on the part of the Drydocks Corporation on the grounds that the required degree of impartiality had not been achieved.

This judgment was delivered by Mr Justice David Scicluna in the case filed by Lino Debono against the Malta Drydocks.

Mr Debono told the court that in 1994 he was charged with violation of disciplinary regulations.

He had been suspended from work and had to face disciplinary proceedings before an ad hoc disciplinary board.

He was informed that the board had found him guilty, and in 1995, he appealed to the appeals board of first instance within the Drydocks.

After Mr Debono's appeal was dismissed, he filed a subsequent appeal which was also dismissed.

According to Mr Debono, the Drydocks had failed to ensure that his case was treated in an impartial manner.

He added that he had been disciplined while his court case was still pending and that the members of the ad hoc disciplinary board had expressed their opinion in writing before hearing Mr Debono's version of events.

Mr Justice Scicluna said that the courts were precluded from examining decisions of a board established by law.

But the courts were duty bound to ensure that such boards observed the principles of natural justice and in particular that the accused was given a fair hearing.

In yesterday's judgment, the court declared that it was perturbed by the fact that one of the persons forming part of the disciplinary board had been involved in the investigations that had led to the proceedings being taken against Mr Debono.

The board was not objectively impartial, and this was in violation of the principles of natural justice.

The court, therefore, found in favour of Mr Debono and concluded that the proceedings before the disciplinary board had been null and void as Mr Debono had not been given a hearing before an impartial tribunal.