A company barred by the government from bidding for public contracts insisted in court today that the decision was "legally obscene" as it was based on a court decision that was "constitutionally incorrect".

Mr Justice Joseph Micallef heard how the Contracts Department had taken a decision to suspend Gafa Saveway from competing for public contracts for two years after breaching laws against precarious employment.

Its decision was based on a judgment handed down by Magistrate Carol Peralta in February this year when three company directors were "reprimanded" after being found guilty of making some of their employees work more hours than they were supposed to.

Company lawyer Edward Gatt said this decision was taken in the absence of any of the directors who failed to appear in court. Rather than issuing an arrest warrant for Antonia, Paulette and Dominic Gafa' appear in court, Magistrate Peralta proceeded with his decision.

Dr Gatt said the company intended to appeal this decision in the Constitutional Court but was seeking a warrant to, in the meantime, stop the Contracts Department from enforcing its decision to ban his clients from competing for public contracts.

On his part, lawyer Christian Falzon Scerri, representing the Attorney General's office, said the decision had been taken and communicated to all the civil service "and there was no turning back".

He said that if Mr Gafa' felt aggrieved by the Magistrates' Court decision, he should have appealed it, something he failed to do. "We cannot use the Constitutional Court to appeal a judgment when the ordinary remedies would not have been taken," he said.

Mr Justice Micallef postponed the case to next week when he will take a decision on the company's request.