MALTA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Antoine Cremona, Clement Mifsud-Bonnici, Luisa Cassar Pullicino and Yasmine Ellul, Ganado Advocates
the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence (2020) and recent reforms in other jurisdictions, Malta could codify: (i) the tribunal’s discretion to hold oral hear - ings via videoconference; and (ii) rules concerning the recording and authentication of such hearings. • Consolidation, Joinder, and Multi-Contract Pro - ceedings: As complex, multi-party disputes become more common, Malta would benefit from express provisions allowing for joinder of third parties, consolidation of parallel proceedings, and multi-contract arbitration. These mechanisms would enhance procedural efficiency and flexibility, particularly in infrastructure, finance, and energy disputes. • Third-Party Funding: Although not prohibited, third-party funding remains unregulated in Malta. Introducing clear guidelines on the disclosure of funding arrangements for purposes of transpar - ency and conflict checks, along with provisions on cost recovery, would provide greater certainty for parties and tribunals alike. • Arbitrator Ethics and Conflicts of Interest: Updat - ing the Code of Ethics for Arbitrators issued by the Malta Arbitration Centre and aligning it with inter - national soft law instruments such as the Interna - tional Bar Association (IBA) Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest or Chartered Institute of Arbitrator’s (CIArb) Code of Conduct, would promote further integrity, impartiality, and party confidence in arbi - tral appointments. Implications of Bill No 133 The proposed Bill No 133, which introduces the re- establishment of a Commercial Court, includes a notable shift in competence over matters relating to the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Under the current framework, the MAC is the designated authority for such functions. However, under the Bill’s present formulation, this responsibility would move to the newly created Commercial Court.
While this development could streamline the enforce - ment process by aligning it more closely with judicial mechanisms, it also raises important questions of leg - islative consistency. In particular, Article 253 (d) of the Code of Organization and Civil Procedure (Chapter 12 of the Laws of Malta) (COCP) currently classifies arbitral awards registered with the MAC as executive titles. If the MAC’s role in the recognition process is removed, this provision would require amendment to reflect that recognition by the Commercial Court, rather than MAC registration, is the operative basis for enforceability. Such an adjustment would be neces - sary to ensure that the transition in authority does not inadvertently undermine the effectiveness of arbitra - tion awards as executive titles. Conclusion There is clear momentum behind arbitration in Malta, particularly in sectors such as construction, public procurement, and shareholder disputes. Updating Malta’s arbitration regime through targeted legislative reform and institutional strengthening offers a timely opportunity to enhance its international appeal and ensure it remains fit for purpose in a changing global landscape. The proposed introduction of the Com - mercial Court under Bill No 133, along with the shift of recognition and enforcement functions to the judiciary, represents a constructive development. To be effec - tive, however, these changes must be accompanied by coherent amendments to related legislation, includ - ing the COCP, the Arbitration Act, and the Arbitration Rules. Ultimately, this should form part of a broader strategy to modernise and consolidate Malta’s arbitra - tion framework, building on its existing strengths and positioning it for the decade ahead.
510 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook