Greenpak files judicial protest
GreenPak has filed a judicial protest after the approving body of eco contributions in the packaging waste retrieval scheme decided to act against four companies which were members of the GRTU’s Green MT Ltd. The companies had ended their membership of...
GreenPak has filed a judicial protest after the approving body of eco contributions in the packaging waste retrieval scheme decided to act against four companies which were members of the GRTU’s Green MT Ltd.
The companies had ended their membership of the GRTU scheme to join the GreenPak Scheme, which they felt suited their needs better. The companies’ switch to GreenPak had been approved by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority.
The GRTU’s Green MT Ltd and GreenPak operate rival, packaging waste retrieval schemes. Margarine Manufacturing Company Ltd, Poultry Products Ltd, the Edible Oil Refining Company Ltd and Food Industries Ltd gave up membership of Green MT Ltd with effect from May 1, 2011, by joining GreenPak.
But the government’s approving body, made up of representatives of Mepa, the Resources and Rural Affairs Ministry, and the Ministry of Finance, the Economy and Investment, subsequently contacted GreenPak to say it would not be approving these four companies’ exemption from the eco contribution on products whose waste would have been recovered under the approving scheme.
GreenPak said the behaviour of the approving body is in direct clash with the provisions of Legal Notice 74 of 2008, which says in part that when a producer who obtains an eco contribution exemption ceases his participation in the scheme for which he applied, he would lose the exemption entitlement and the producer would have to pay the eco contribution, with interest – but when a producer ceases participation in an approved scheme in which he would have participated continuously for at least six months in a calendar year, the exemption entitlement for the relevant calendar year would not be forfeited.
GreenPak said the behaviour of the approving body was unjust to it because that behaviour impeded it from competing freely in the market. It said it was considering taking the matter to court.