The Arturo Mercieca Court (1924-1940) A Legal Analysis by Tonio Borg

Description

The latest work by Professor Tonio Borg consists of a legal analysis of judgments delivered over a sixteen year period (1924-40) during which Sir Arturo Mercieca a Maltese legal luminary, presided over the Court of Appeal as Chief Justice. The judgments cover a wide range of topics related public law, such as the question whether a written constitution is supreme even though it does not contain a supremacy clause, the right of any citizen to file an action as to electoral matters and disputes without the need of proving personal interest, and the TUC Senators election saga which led not only to a declaration of invalidity of the election of such senators but also a declaration that all laws passed on the strength of the votes of the two TUC senators were null. The pride of place however, is taken up by the ultra vires cases, particularly Strickland v. Sammut where it was decided that after the suspension of self-government the British authorities could not legislate by Order in Council on non-reserved matters. Other subjects include the dual personality of the State doctrine, professional secrecy, and those relating to freedom of expression and the libel and sedition laws, where the Mercieca Court delivered some rather avant-garde decisions.