Court hearing on gaming arcades postponed

Dr Emmy Bezzina, B.A.,LL.D.

Aug 8th 2009, 21:50

For clarification`s sake,lawyers are not usually notified - they do not have to be notified unless specifically ordered by the Court. Lawyers represent the legal interests of their clients. It is the latter who have to be notified. In this Case,the Counter Warrant was requested by the AG so it had to be the latter to notify the interested Parties NOT their legal representatives.If the interested parties were not notified but an attempt was made to notify their lawyers,then the latter are definitely not to blame as Lawyers are Legal Representatives not Messengers or Court Marshals.Regrettably an outright abuse is ongoing constantly where legal representatives are deliberately notified entrusting the lawyers then to run after their clients.It is not the obligation of lawyers to do so.However very often legal howlers are committed through wrong procedural application of legal procedures.Hence people should get the facts straight before commenting.If however the defendant Gaming Companies were duly notified,then it was the latter`s duty to get in touch with their respective lawyers.

Joseph Vassallo

Aug 8th 2009, 20:32

May I introduce your "Wannabe Winners" to a competent analysis of so-called fruit machines. I hope they find it useful and not too shocking. Hit the link below.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/bargains-and-rip-offs/article.html?in_article_id=487470&in_page_id=5&ito=1723

D. A . Agius

Aug 8th 2009, 19:11

The lawyers should have been brought in court by court marshals. IF they refused, the warrant should have been scrapped and authorities should have continued the job.

"Konna w ghadna nghixu....f'pajjiz tal- mickey mouse...."

Joseph Vassallo

Aug 8th 2009, 19:00

The lawyers did not receive official notification in the prescribed time and won the day (in part) by not turning up this morning; after all, the prohibitory injunction is only intended to temporarily delay confiscation of equipment by the police. So there it is then; delayed by 15 days already. Meanwhile the outlets remain closed and the government scores a point too and so far it's a draw.

What might the next strategy be for a further delay? Whatever that might be, it will be legal, rest assured? Nothing wrong with that either.

I think a few good educative programmes on TV about how gambling is an all-time loss, would do more good than closing these places and driving gambling back underground.

Controls can be better applied when outlets are open to scrutiny but not so much when they are underground. How do you control someone betting on which side of a centre-line (across a table) the first fly will land on?

Las Vegas charges no personal income tax at all and is fiscally funded by gambling taxes including taxes on any win above $1800. Now there's an idea!

Michael Andrews

Aug 8th 2009, 18:58

I would close them all down and keep them closed.
I have seen first hand alot of people gambling away literally all their money and borrowing to play more.
It is a nasty habit and once it's takes control it is like a drug.
These places do more harm than good IMO and unfortunately more and more people have taken up the habit.

martin saliba

Aug 8th 2009, 15:48

Should it not have been the responsibility of the gaming companies to notify their lawyers ?

jmicallef

Aug 8th 2009, 15:15

Simply unbeleivable!!!

Efficiency at it's best Dr Mifsud Bonnici!!

Franco Farrugia

Aug 8th 2009, 15:04

@ Mr Anthony Dimech: What's your problem, mate? Are you so besotted by partisan politics that you're missing the wood for the trees? Can't you see that it does no social good to have these type of betting places around but especially ones that are not covered by licence? Talk about grumble, grumble, grumbling all the time and being unable to please everyone!!

A. Borg

Aug 8th 2009, 14:06

I believe that the government simply wants a piece of the cake. If not, why don't he close all the Maltco lotteries outlets too? Why don't he cut all the internet connections so there will be no online bettings? The gaming outlets will remain open but with a fee for every machine there is in the shop.That is why the machines were counted! They had 100% profit but not anymore! LOL

Keith Goodlip

Aug 8th 2009, 13:35

Speaking about shooting oneself in the foot

Anthony Farrugia

Aug 8th 2009, 13:08

Find it very hard to believe that in Malta ANYONE did not know the hearing was this morning.

it was ALL over every internet news portal and on everyones lips yesterday. Well maybe thee lawyers do not read the papers:)) Apart from all the news on tv yesterday! We'll hope these 6 teams of lawyers read the papers ow watch the news on the coming 15 days! This country never fails to surprise me. Anyway, well done police finally job well done. We were starting to experience GAMING POLLUTION in this country. Re the new rules anyone knows how many machines they will be allowed to operate?

A. Borg

Aug 8th 2009, 12:32

Probably will be decided in 2015.

mvella

Aug 8th 2009, 12:09

"Since the lawyers representing eight of the seven companies were not notified..." this might be a breakthrough in the study of binomial coefficients.