The legal battle instituted by the heir of Mabel Strickland, Robert Hornyold-Strickland against Allied Newspapers Ltd, concerning the alleged irregular transfer of shares to the Strickland Foundation by the testamentary executors, continued in court today.
As the sons of the late testamentary executors took the witness stand, lawyers for the parties were locked in a legal argument concerning the disclosure of sensitive information contained in documents which had belonged to Ms Strickland.
Dr Max Ganado, as successor of his father Professor Joe Ganado, testified that he is not and never has been a testamentary executor of Ms Strickland's will. He explained that he had only assisted his late father to sort out documents related to the inheritance. In fact, he declared he had consigned to the applicant's lawyer copies of documents related to the will and executorship of Ms Strickland.
The witness pointed out that his father qua testamentary executor did not act as legal adviser to any party involved. Asked by the applicant's lawyers to reveal information in documents previously held by his late father, lawyers for the respondents objected on the grounds that such documents are covered by a legal privilege.
Next to testify was Mario de Marco, son of the late President Guido de Marco who, from 1987 had taken up the role of testamentary executor of Ms Strickland together with Prof. Ganado. The witness pointed out he was never an executor or legal adviser to the Strickland Foundation.
Asked by the applicant's lawyers whether he held any documents pertaining to Ms Strickland, Dr de Marco pointed out he was not his father's heir, a role which pertained to his mother. Moreover, he observed that any such files were not his personal property and that he lacked authorisation to produce them in court.
The crux of the argument lay in whether revealing the information contained in such documents would violate the laws on professional secrecy. It was observed by the respondents that lawyers, like priests, are bound by strict rules of professional secrecy. Revealing sensitive information contained in documents of deceased lawyers would create a dangerous precedent, the respondents argued.
Given the circumstances of this lawsuit, such sensitive documents are vital to shed light upon the the true intention of the testator, the applicant argued.
The court presided by Mr Justice Silvio Meli, observed that its role is to safeguard professional ethics. The case continues.
Prof. Ian Refalo and Dr Joseph Schembri appeared for the applicant.
Prof. Andrew Muscat, Dr Richard Camilleri and Dr Louise Sant Fournier appeared for the respondents.
.