A court yesterday ruled the imprisonment of a man found in contempt of court violated his fundamental right to liberty.

Edmond Mugliett, who was jailed for seven days last December by the Court of Appeal, was awarded €1,000 in compensation.

Mr Justice Mark Chetcuti delivered the ruling following a constitutional application filed by Mr Mugliett against the Attorney General.

In June 2006, Mr Mugliett had been ordered by the court to refund the sum of €94,339.59 to the heirs of the late John Hayman after he took the funds from an account he held jointly with Notary Hayman five years earlier. The order was given pending a ruling over who the funds belonged to.

When Mr Mugliett failed to comply with the order, the Court Registrar filed an action for contempt of court against him and, last December 6, the Court of Appeal jailed him for seven days.

Mr Mugliett claimed the sentence was in violation of his fundamental human right to freedom from arbitrary deprivation of liberty.

Mr Justice Chetcuti pointed out that failure to comply with the terms and conditions of a judgment delivered by a court consisted in contempt of court. However, case law of the European Court had established that detention should be seen as a remedy of last resort. Lesser measures were to be considered and it was only if they were found to be insufficient could detention be invoked.

The heirs of the late Dr Hayman were obliged to ensure the enforcement of the judgment delivered against Mr Mugliett and they were entitled to issue executive warrants against him. The Court of Appeal had not investigated whether the heirs had, in fact, taken such action and had handed down a prison sentence rather than see whether lesser measures could have been invoked, the judge ruled.

He, therefore, found in favour of Mr Mugliett.