Judge confirms libel damages award

The Court of Appeal in its inferior jurisdiction confirmed a libel judgment in terms of which Victor Camilleri, editor of the newspaper Il-Mument, was ordered to pay €699 in libel damages to Joseph Ciantar. The court heard that Mr Ciantar had claimed...

The Court of Appeal in its inferior jurisdiction confirmed a libel judgment in terms of which Victor Camilleri, editor of the newspaper Il-Mument, was ordered to pay €699 in libel damages to Joseph Ciantar.

The court heard that Mr Ciantar had claimed before the Magistrates' Court that an article titled Tbażwir Finanzjarju Fil-Kunsill Lokali Ta' Ħaż-Żebbuġ (Financial mess at Żebbuġ local council), published on November 9, 2003, was libellous in his regard.

The article was sub-titled Jingħataw Direct Orders Li Għalihom Inħarġu Kontijiet Ta' Aktar Minn €46,600 (Bills exceeding €46,600 issued after direct orders).

According to Mr Ciantar, who was mayor of the local council at the time, the article alleged that he had awarded three contracts by direct order without a call for tenders in violation of the council's procedures.

Mr Ciantar said no journalist had investigated the matter. He insisted that he had issued all contracts in a regular manner in terms of law. The council had approved such action and had acted in a transparent and legal manner.

The first court had ruled that it was vital in a democracy for the press to be serious and to carry out proper investigations. In this case, it resulted that Mr Camilleri had made a number of allegations based solely on information given to him by a councillor who was Mr Ciantar's adversary. The department responsible for local government had investigated the allegations and had not censured the Żebbuġ council or its mayor.

In conclusion, the first court awarded Mr Ciantar €699 in libel damages.

Mr Camilleri appealed to the Court of Appeal.

On appeal, the court, presided over by Mr Justice Philip Sciberras, held that comment or criticism of public figures was necessary in a democratic society. However, when unjustified allegations were made, these could be considered to be libellous. The court held that the first court had correctly decided on the facts of the case and so confirmed its judgment.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.