A case over alleged theft is to be re-heard by a magistrate after a note of submissions by the accused was not inserted in the case file and the magistrate never saw it before condemning the accused to 15 months imprisonment.

Jason Spiteri had been declared guilty in January 2017 and had appealed the conviction. A constitutional reference was made where it was claimed that his right to a fair hearing was breached because his note of submissions, filed in the court registry in October 2016, had not made it to the acts of the case.

Consequently, the submissions were not considered by the magistrate before the delivery of the judgment.

Mr Justice Silvio Meli sitting in the First Hall, Civil Court in its constitutional jurisdiction found in favour of Mr Spiteri.

He said the court had analysed the proceedings as a whole in order to determine whether the alleged failure had been such as to have a determining effect upon the outcome of the case.

It was clear that the magistrates' court had been “totally deprived of the submissions” and could not therefore conduct “a full and complete evaluation” of the defence raised by Mr Spiteri.

As a result of the administrative shortcoming, Mr Spiteri had been denied ‘equality of arms,’ which consequently meant that his right to a fair hearing had been compromised.

Such a “procedural imbalance” should never have been caused by the court administration, whose role was to ensure that all acts were brought to the cognizance of the presiding judiciary, the judge said.

Mr Spiteri had suffered a breach of rights and his case was therefore being referred back to the  Magistrates’ Court to be re-examined.

Lawyers Arthur Azzopardi and Rene Darmanin were counsel to the appellant.

(Mr Spiteri did not serve any time in prison since he had appealed his conviction.)