A judge has ruled that a challenge to the way Henley and Partners was chosen as concessionaires for the Individual Investor Programme can continue but not against former Home Affairs Minister Manuel Mallia and the Attorney General, who had nothing to do with the selection process.

Mr Justice Joseph. R. Micallef was ruling in a case instituted by Arton Capital, which had been in the race when the concessionaires were being chosen.

The case was filed against Dr Mallia, his former Permanent Secretary Kevin Mahoney and Attorney General Peter Grech.

Through lawyer Tanya Sciberras Camilleri, the Canadian financial advisory firm filed a court application in October 2013 requesting the court to declare the process to grant the concessionaire status as null, claiming it was illegal and abusive.

The company had appealed a decision taken by the Evaluation Committee but the appeal was refused by the Review Board.

The former minister and the Attorney General filed preliminary pleas, saying they should not be part of the case as they had nothing to do with the selection process. Moreover, they argued that Henley and Partners should have been made party to the suit.

They also stated that Arton was contractually prevented from challenging the decision of the Review Board, which was final and binding.

Mr Justice Micallef dismissed all pleas except the one in which Dr Mallia and Dr Grech said they had nothing to do with the selection process.

On the matter of calling Henley and Partners into the suit, the judge said the case was not a direct action against its competitors but one to challenge the way its competitor was chosen.

It therefore said that Henley and Partners need not be part of the suit.

He ordered that the case continues against Mr Mahoney, as the former ministry permanent secretary.