Judge suspends execution of bills of exchange worth over Lm2 million

A court yesterday suspended the execution of bills of exchange for a value of over Lm2 million after the debtor submitted that they contained a strong element of usury.

The judgment was delivered by Mr Justice Lino Farrugia Sacco in an application filed by Ronald Azzopardi against Giovanni Briffa.

Mr Azzopardi filed his application in the First Hall of the Civil Court after he was served with two judicial letters filed against him by Mr Briffa who wanted to enforce the bills of exchange in a total sum of Lm2,112,222.

According to Mr Azzopardi, there were valid reasons at law for him to contest the enforcement of the bills. Included in the sums claimed by Mr Briffa was an excessive amount of interest that constituted usury. This rendered the bills null and void.

Mr Azzopardi told the court he actually owed Mr Briffa Lm314,588. This was a clear case of usury and he would be reporting the crime to the police and to the fiscal authorities. Mr Azzopardi said the bills of exchange had originally been issued in favour of Emmanuel Briffa who had then endorsed them in favour of Giovanni Briffa.

Giovanni Briffa denied Mr Azzopardi's allegations. He said he had loaned Mr Azzopardi large sums of money over the years and that he had not been repaid. It was for this reason that he had eventually wanted to have bills of exchange issued by Mr Azzopardi to cover the money loaned to him.

Mr Briffa told the court the bills represented the sum of Lm314,588 together with interest from September 1994 to November 2004. The bills also represented other loans totalling Lm1,400,000 and interest from February 2003 to November 2004.

Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco said that, technically, Mr Azzopardi could not raise any pleas against Mr Briffa due to the nature of a bill of exchange. However, the court was empowered by law to suspend the enforcement of bills of exchange for serious and valid reasons. While Mr Azzopardi's allegation of usury was serious, it had to be investigated in depth by a court requested to do so in a specific action challenging the validity of the bills.

The court was examining Mr Azzopardi's allegation on a prima facie basis and it had serious doubts about the alleged transactions that were supposed to have taken place.

In conclusion, the court upheld Mr Azzopardi's request and suspended the enforcement of the bills of exchange.