A magistrate has criticised Enemalta for abusing its dominant position to force clients to renounce their legal rights and issued an injunction preventing the corporation from suspending the power supply at a man’s home.

Magistrate Paul Coppini, presiding over the Gozo Court, upheld Teddy Cefai’s application for an injunction after hearing how he was threatened with being cut off unless he paid €9,300.

Mr Cefai filed an application on June 23, soon after he was called for a meeting at Enemalta’s Gozo offices before nine officials, including the corporation’s chairman, accusing him of electricity theft.

He said he was told they had a strong suspicion that his electricity meter was under-registering consumption and calculated that he owed Enemalta €9,300.

Mr Cefai testified that he was faced with a take-it-or-leave-it offer: either to pay the sum or be left with no electricity.

He told officials that he was not willing to admit to something he had not done and said he wanted to consult his lawyers.

He was faced with a take-it-or-leave-it offer: either pay or be left with no electricity

While he was at the Enemalta office, the corporation’s employees were outside his home awaiting instructions to proceed with the action. He felt he was left with no option but to file an urgent injunction in court. Enemalta opposed the request, saying it acted within the parameters of the law.

Subsidiary legislation on electricity supply, first enacted in May 1940, gives the corporation the power to suspend supply if it is “reasonably satisfied that an electricity meter has been tampered with or that a consumer or a person has obtained an unlawful supply of electricity... or responsible for theft of electricity”.

Enemalta officers testified that there were discrepancies in meter readings and they had drawn the conclusion that electricity theft was taking place. They said they suspected that powerful magnets were being used to slow down the meter reading and that was why Mr Cefai was called in and asked to pay the amount if he wanted to avoid being cut off.

However, Mr Cefai said he was being denied his basic right to defend himself and to be judged by an impartial and independent tribunal. He also complained that the €9,300 he was asked to pay was fixed arbitrarily by Enemalta.

As he upheld the request for the issuance of an injunction, stopping Enemalta from suspending supply at his house, Magistrate Coppini slammed Enemalta which, he noted, enjoyed a monopoly on the supply and distribution of electricity.

“The court believes that Enemalta should not abuse its monopolistic position by giving clients no option but to renounce to their basic rights. There are several methods the company can adopt, just like any other creditor, to protect its interests,” the magistrate said.