A card company has forcefully rebutted allegations by a marketing firm that held it responsible for its €1.5 million losses, saying it was the latter company that had abandoned the contract.

Insignia Cards Limited filed a counter protest replying to the judicial protest filed earlier this week by Yes Media Limited.

It said that contrary to what had been alleged, Yes Media had abandoned the contract after having carried out “absolutely nothing” of what had been agreed.

In addition, an automatic termination clause had been triggered by the particular circumstances of the case, the defendant company said.

It explained that the contract in question was one of a series that formed part of a Master Services Agreement concluded by Lighthouse Communications Limited, a subsidiary of the Lighthouse Group of Companies.

It said Yes Media belonged entirely to Roderick Muscat Monsingeur, who also owned 75 per cent of the Lighthouse Group of Companies.

Insignia Cards alleged that Yes Media had failed to fulfill its contractual obligations because it lacked the operational, technical and financial means to do so and not because of any shortcomings by the defendant.

These weaknesses had not been evident when the contract was signed, but only emerged after a few months, “when it resulted that Yes Media was a company without substance”.

Far from having caused millions of euros worth of losses to Yes Media, it was the Yes Media actions and those of Mr Muscat Monsigneur that had led Insignia to suffer losses.

In addition, Insignia Cards warned of further legal action against Yes Media over defamation as well as over breach of a confidentiality obligation of the same contract.

Lawyer John Refalo signed the counter protest.