A man, give, a jail term over his alleged involvement in a robbery from a Żabbar residence almost 10 years ago, is to have his case heard anew after an Appeals Court quashed the judgment on the basis of a formal defect.

Christopher Scerri, 40, had been handed a 2-year effective jail term in connection with the burglary, alongside his alleged partner-in-crime, Freddie Delia, 40, who was given a suspended sentence.

Mr Scerri’s lawyer had filed an appeal challenging the conviction on the grounds of a wrong appreciation of facts by the Magistrates’ Court, where the prosecution’s case had pinned upon the testimony of Omar Pisani as a dubious witness and one who was “absolutely not credible”.

The latter had admitted to his involvement in the burglary and had testified against the other men, and his version was corroborated by the circumstantial evidence which in reality “led to nowhere,” the appellant had argued.

Indeed, a Pajero allegedly driven by Mr Scerri had left the scene of the crime some three quarters of an hour before the robbery took place, its driver being identified through a “green T-shirt” later discovered at his ex’s home.

However, the court of criminal appeal, presided over by Madam Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera, did not enter into the merits of the appeal, observing instead ‘ex officio’ that the judgment was null since the first court had failed to specify, in the operative part of the judgment, the articles of the law upon which it had based the conviction.

For this reason the court annulled the judgment, sending back the case for re-hearing before the Magistrates’ Court.

Lawyer Franco Debono was counsel to the appellant.