Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 1 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja  
 
MALTA  
 
QORTI TA' L -APPELL  
 
 
S.T.O. PRIM IMHALLEF  
VINCENT DE GAETANO  
 
ONOR. IMHALLEF  
ALBERT J. MAGRI  
 
ONOR. IMHALLEF  
TONIO MALLIA  
 
 
 
Seduta tat -28 ta' Settembru, 2007  
 
 
Appell Civili Numru. 217/2006/1  
 
 
 
 
GIE Pari Mutuel Urbain (PMU) socjeta` estera  
(Numr u ta’ registrazzjoni 775 671 258  
fir-registru tal -Kummerc u Kumpaniji ta’ Parigi, 
Franza)  
kif rapprezentata mill -Avukat Dr Brigitte Zammit  
 
v. 
 
Bell Med Limited (C26412) u  
Computer Aided Technologies Limited (C18050)  
 
 
Il-Qorti:  
 
Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 2 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja  Rat ir -rikors ipprezenta t fit-30 ta’ Marzu 2006 fil -Prim Awla 
tal-Qorti Civili mill -Avukat Dottor Brigitte Zammit bhala 
mandatarja specjali tas -socjeta` estera GIE Pari Mutuel 
Urbain li tghid hekk1: 
“1. Illi permezz ta’ sentenza moghtija fit -2 ta’ Novembru 
2005 fl -ismijiet GIE Pa ri Mutuel Urbain (PMU) vs Bell 
Med Limited (C26412) u Computer Aided 
Technologies Limited (C 18050) , l-Ewwel Vici -President 
tal-Qorti ta’ l -Ewwel Istanza ta’ Parigi, Franza inter alia 
ordnat is -segwenti:  
 
“... hereby orders the companies Bell Med Ltd. and 
Computer Aided Technologies Ltd., incorporated under 
Maltese law, to block access to the site www.zeturf.com  
for such time as on -line betting operatins shall be 
conducted via the said site, subject to an interim penalty 
of one thousand five hundred Euros ( EUR 1,500) for each 
day’s delay following the expiry of a period of 72 hours 
from the enforcement of this judgment;  
 
“whereby any problems in consequence thereof shall be 
referred to this Court;  
 
“hereby confirms the liability incumbent upon the 
companies Bell Med Ltd and Computer Aided 
Technologies Ltd for the payment of compensation in 
favour of the E.I.G. Pari Mutuel Urbain, which shall not 
seriously be disputed,  
 
“hereby instructs the companies Bell Med Ltd and 
Computer Aided Technologies Ltd to assume joint and 
several liability for the settlement in favour of the E.I.G. 
Pari Mutuel Urbain of interim compensation to the amount 
of thirty thousand Euros (EUR 30,000),  
 
... 
 
“hereby instructs that this judgment be served by say of 
interim enforcement ipso j ure, 
 
                                                           
1 Ir-rikors gie korrett bid -digriet ta’ l -istess Qorti tal -4 ta’ April 2006 ghal d ik li hi r -
riferenza ghas -sentenza franciza.  
Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 3 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja  “hereby jointly and severally condemns the companies 
Bell Med Ltd and Computer Aided Technologies Ltd to the 
burden of the costs” (f’pagna 13 tas -sentenza – hawn 
annessa u mmarkata Dok B2 (traduzzjoni ufficjali bl -ilsien 
Ingliz).  
 
“2. Illi f’materja civili u kummercjali ai termini ta’ l -
Artikolu 1 tar -Regolament 44/2001 dwar il -Gurisdizzjoni u 
r-Rikonoxximent u l -Infurzar ta’ Sentenzi f’Materji Civili u 
Kummercjali2, huma d -disposizzjonijiet ta’ dan ir -
Regolament li jirregolaw l -infurzar ta’ sentenzi moghtija 
minn qrati ta’ Stati Membri ta’ l -Unjoni Ewropeja.  
 
“Fi kliem l -Artikolu 1 tar -Regolament 44/2001:  
 
“This Regulation shall apply in civil and commercial 
matters whatever the nature of the court or tribunal.  
 
“3. Illi dan il -principju li r -Regolame nti Ewropej 
ghandhom effett dirett fl -Istati Membri ta’ l -Unjoni 
Ewropeja u jikkostitwixxu parti mill -legislazzjoni ta’ l -istess 
Stati Membri huwa principju baziku tal -ligi ta’ l -Unjoni 
Ewropeja.  L -Artikolu 249 tat -Trattat ta’ l -Unjoni Ewropeja 
jghid hekk : 
“... A regulation shall have general application.  It shall be 
binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member 
States....  
 
“4. Illi dna il -principju huwa inoltre ribadut fl -Att ta’ l -
Unjoni Ewropeja (Kap. 460 tal -Ligijiet ta’ Malta), li fl -
Artikolu 3 jghid hekk:  
 
“(1)  Mill -Ewwel ta’ Mejju 2004, it -Trattat u atti ezistenti u 
futuri adottati mill -Unjoni Ewtopea ghandhom jorbtu lil 
Malta u ghandhom ikunu parti mil -ligi domestika taghha 
taht il -kondizzjonijiet stipulati fit -Trattat.  
 
“(2)  Kull  disposizzjoni ta’ ligi li mid -data msemmija tkun 
inkompatibbli ma’ l -obbligazzjonijiet ta’ Malta taht it -Trattat 
jew li tidderoga minn xi dritt moghti lil xi persuna bit -Trattat 
                                                           
2 OJL 12, 16.1.2001,p.1  
Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 4 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja  jew tahtu ghandha, safejn dik il -ligi tkun inkompatibbli ma’ 
dawk id -drittiji et, tkun bla effett u ma tkunx tista’ tigi 
infurzata.  
 
“Inoltre, l -Artikolu 4(1) ta’ l -istess Att jghid hekk:  
 
“Dawk id -drittijiet, setghat, responsabbiltajiet, obbligi u 
restrizzjonijiet li minn zmien ghal zmien jinholqu jew 
johorgu minn jew taht it -Trattat, u dawk ir -rimedji u 
proceduri kollha li minn zmien ghal zmien ikun hemm 
provdut dwarhom bi jew taht it -Trattat, li skond it -Trattat 
ghandhom, minghajr ebda htiega ohra ta’ ghemil ta’ ligi , 
jinghataw effett legali jew jintuzaw f’Malta, ghandhom jigu 
rikonoxxuti u jkunu legalment invokabbli, u jigu infurzati, 
permessi u mharsa bhala tali .” (enfazi mizjuda)  
 
“5. Illi l-Artikolu 38(1) tar -Regolament 44/2001 jghid 
hekk:  
 
“A judgment given in a Member State and enforceable in 
that State  shall be enforced in a nother Member State 
when, on the application of any interested party, it has 
been declared enforceable there .  (enfazi mizjuda)  
 
“6. Illi ghalhekk, sentenza li l -infurzar taghha jkun qed 
jigi mitlub ai termini tar -Regolament 44/2001 ghandha (a) 
tikkwalifik a bhala “sentenza” ghall -finijiet ta’ l -Artikolu 32 
ta’ l-istess Regolament; u (b) tkun enfurzabbli fl -Istat 
Membru li fih tkun giet moghtija, f’dan il -kaz fi Franza.  
 
“7. Illi ghall -finijiet tar -Regolament 44/2001, il -kelma 
“sentenza” (“ judgemnt ”) hija de finita mill -Artikolu 32 ta’ l -
imsemmi Regolament 44/2001 bhala  
 
“any judgment given by a court or tribunal of a Member 
State, whatever the judgment may be called, including a 
decree, oreder, decision or writ of execution, as well as 
the determination of co sts or expenses by an officer of the 
court.  
 
“Is-sentenza li s -socjeta` rikorrenti qed titlob hawnhekk illi 
tigi enfurzata minn din l -Onorabbli Qorti (Doks B1, B2) 
Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 5 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja  tikkwalifika bhala “ judgment ” ai termini ta’ din id -
definizzjoni.  
 
“8. Illi l-Qorti ta’ l -Ewwel Istanza ta’ Parigi inoltre 
taghmilha cara illi din is -sentenza (Doks B1, B2) ghandha 
tkun “... served by way of interim enforcement ipso jure ” 
(f’pagna 13 tas -sentenza).  
 
Ghalhekk huwa car illi s -sentenza hija enfurzabbli fi 
Franza.  
 
“9. Illi skond Art ikolu 39(1) tar -Regolament 44/2001, ir -
rikors ikkontemplat mill -Artikolu 38(1) (citat f’paragrafu 5 
hawn fua), ghandu jigi maghmul fil -qorti kompeteneti 
indikata fit -tieni Anness tar -Regolament 44/2001, il -qorti 
kompetenti fil -kaz ta’ Malta hija l -Prim Awl a tal-Qorti Civili.  
 
Inoltre, skond l -Artikolu 40(1) tar -Regolament 44/2001, 
hija l -lex fori  li ghandha tirregola l -procedura li wiehed 
ghandu jsegwi meta jaghmel tali rikors.  Fi kliem dan l -
Artikolu 40(1): “ the procedure for making the application 
shall be governed by the law of the Member State in 
which enforcement is sought.  
 
L-Artikoli dwar l -infurzar ta’ sentenzi moghtija minn qrati 
ta’ pajjizi barra minn Malta, kontenuti taht Titolu V tal -
Kodici ta’ l -Organizzazzjoni u Procedura Civili (Kap. 12 
tal-Ligijiet ta’ Malta) (“KOPC”), huma ghalhekk appikabbli 
ghall -kaz odjern.  
 
“10. Illi l-Artikolu 826 tal -KOPC jghid hekk:  
 
“is-sentenzi moghtija minn qorti kompetenti ta’ pajjiz barra 
minn Malta, u li jkunu saru gudikat, jistghu jigu ezegwiti 
mill-qorti kompe tenti ta’ Malta, bhas -sentenzi moghtija 
f’Malta, fuq citazzjoni b’talba biex tigi ordnata l -
ezekuzzjoni ta’ dawk is -sentenzi .  (enfazi mizjuda).  
 
“11. Illi ai termini ta’ l -imsemmi Artikolu 826 KOPC, 
sentenza ghandha tkun “ res judicata ” sabiex tkun tista’ tigi 
enfurzata f’Malta mill -qrati kompetenti ta’ Malta.  
 
Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 6 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja  “12. Illi d-definizzjoni ta’ “ judgment ” skond l -Artikolu 32 
tar-Regolament 44/2001 (citat f’paragrafu 7 hawn fuq) ma 
ssemmix tali rekwizit.  
 
“13. Illi l-Artikolu 825A KOPC jaghmilha bic -car illi:  
 
“Meta Regolamenti ta’ l -Unjoni Ewropea jipprovdu, dwar 
affarijiet regolati taht dan it -Titolu, b’mod li jkun differenti 
milli hemm f’dan it -Titolu, dawk ir -regolamenti ghandhom 
jipprevalixxu, u d -disposizzjonijiet ta’ dan it -Titolu 
ghandhom biss japplikaw me ta ma jkunux inkonsistenti 
mad-disposizzjonijiet ta’ dawm ir -regolamenti jew 
f’affarijiet li ma jaqghux fl -amibitu ta’ dawk ir -regolamenti .  
(enfazi mizjuda)  
 
“14. In vista tal -premess, l -uniku kriterju li ghandu jigi 
determinat huwa jekk is -sentenza tal -Qorti ta’ l -Ewwel 
Istanza ta’ Parigi, Franza (Doks B1, B2) tissodisfax ir -
rekwiziti tar -Regolament 44/2001, li skond l -Artikolu 825A 
KOPC ghandu jipprevalixxi fuq il -KOPC f’kaz ta’ 
inkonsistenza bejn iz -zewg ligijiet.  
 
“Kif indikat f’paragrafu 8 hawn fuq, i s-sentenza tissodisfa 
r-rekwiziti tar -Regolament 44/2001.  
 
“Fi kliem iehor, is -sentenza (Doks B1, B2) m’ghandhiex 
ghalfejn tkun “ res judicata ” ai termini ta’ l -Artikolu 826 
KOPC biex tigi enfurzata.  
 
“15. Illi inkwantu l -Artikolu 826 KOPC mhuwiex 
inkonsist enti mad -dispozizzjonijiet tar -Regolament 
44/2001, l -istess Artikolu 826 KOPC ghandu japplika biex 
jirregola l -procedura ghall -infurzar tas -sentenza barranija.  
 
“16. Illi skond l -Att XXII tas -senta 2005, li dahal in vigore 
fil-15 ta’ Jannar 2006, il -kelma “citazzjoni” fl -imsemmi 
Artikolu 826 tal -KOPC giet sostitwita bil -kelma “rikors”.  
 
“Ghalhekk qieghed isir dan ir -rikors.  
 
“17. Illi inoltre l -Artikolu 40(3) tar -Regolament 44/2001 
jipprovdi illi d -dokumenti li ghalihom jaghmel referenza l -
Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 7 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja  Artikolu 53 ta’ l -imsemmi Regolament ghandhom jigu 
annessi ma’ rikors ghall -infurzar ta’ sentenza moghtija 
minn qorti ta’ Stati Membri ta’ l -Unjoni Ewropeja.  
 
“18. Illi l-Artikolu 41 tar -Regolament 44/2001 jghid hekk:  
 
“The judgment shall be declared enforceable immediatel y 
on completion of the formalities in Article 53  without any 
review under Articles 34 and 35.  The party against whom 
enforcement is sought shall not at this stage of the 
proceedings be entitled to make any submissions on the 
application .  (nfazi mizjuda)  
 
“19. Illi skond Artikolu 53 ta’ l -imsemmi Regolament, is -
segwenti dokumenti qeghdin jigu annessi ma’ dan ir -
rikors:  
 
“i) Anness immarkat “Dok B1” – kopja legali tas -
sentenza moghtija fit -2 ta’ Novmebru 2005 mill -Qorti ta’ l -
Ewwel Istanza ta’ Parigi, Franz a, li s -socjeta` rikorrenti 
qieghda titlob li tigi infurzata kontra s -socjeta` intimata 
permess ta’ dan ir -rikors;  
 
“ii) Anness immarkat “Dok B2” – traduzzjoni ufficjali tas -
sentenza immarkata Dok B1, bl -ilsien Ingliz, liema 
traduzzjoni hija certifikata mi nn traduttur ikkwalifikat u 
rikonozzut fi Franza, skond ma hu rikjest mill -Artikolu 
55(2);  
 
“iii) Anness immarkat “Dok C” – ic-certifikat mahrug mill -
Qorti ta’ l -Ewwel Istanza ta’ Parigi, Franza kif rikjest mill -
Artikolu 54.  
 
“20. Illi inoltre jidher bic -car mic -citat Artikolu 41 ta’ l -
imsemmi Regolament 44/2001 illi s -socjeta` intimata 
m’ghandha l -ebda dritt u mhuwiex ammess li taghmel 
sottomissjonijiet ta’ kwalunkwe tip f’dan l -istadju tal -
process ghall -infurzar tas -sentenza tal -Qorti ta’ l -Ewwel 
Istanza ta’ Parigi, Franza.  
 
“21. Illi f’dan ir -rigward is -socjeta` rikorrenti taghmel 
riferenza ghad -digriet moghti minn din l -istess Onorabbli 
Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 8 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja  Qorti diversament preseduta, fejn din il -Qorti laqghet it -
talba tas -socjeta` rikorrenti ghall -enfurzar ta’ sentenza 
moghtija mill -Qorti ta’ l -Appell ta’ Parigi, Franciza (digriet 
moghti fis -16 ta’ Marzu 2006, fl -atti tar -rikors ipprezentat 
fit-23 ta’ Frar 2006 fl -ismijiet GIE Pari Mutuel Urbain 
(PMU) socjeta` estera (Numru ta’ registrazzjoni 775 671 
258 fir -registru tal -Kummerc u Kumpanija ta’ Parigi, 
Franza) vs. Zeturf Limited (C 35469) , anness hawnhekk u 
mmarkat Dok D).  
 
“Ghaldaqstant in vista tal -premess, ir -rikorrenti nomine bir -
rispett titlob lil din l -Onorabbli Qorti sabiex minnufih 
tirrikonoxxi d -decizjoni tal -Qorti ta’ l-Ewwel Istanza, ta’ 
Parigi, Franza (Doks B1, B2) u tiddikjara li din id -decizjoni 
enforzabbli kontra s -socjetajiet intimati ai termini tar -
Regolament 44/2001, kif sottomess hawn fuq, taht 
kwalunkwe provvediment illi din l -Onorabbli Qorti 
joghgobha tag hti. 
 
“Bl-ispejjez kontra s -socjetajiet intimati”.  
 
Rat ir -risposta tas -socjetajiet Bell Med Ltd. u Computer 
Aided Technologies Limited tas -17 ta’ April 2006, li in 
forza taghha ssottomettew illi:  
“Illi l-esponenti jissottomettu li t -talba tar -rikorrenti u  cioe` 
ta’ rikonoxximent u enfurzar tas -sentenza barranija mhiex 
permessibbli billi mhux konformi mar -Regolamenti 
44/2001 ta’ l -Unjoni Ewropeja kif spjegat hawn taht.  
 
“In linea preliminari l -esponenti jaghmlu referenza ghall -
Artikolu 49 tar -Regolamenti 44 /2001 ta’ L -Unjoni Ewropeja 
li jghid:  
 
“A foreign judgement which orders a periodic payment by 
way of a penalty shall be enforceable in the Member State 
in which enforcement is sought only (enfazi mizjuda) if 
the amount of the payment has been finally dete rmined by 
the courts of the Member State of origin.  
 
“Kif jirrizulta mid -decizjoni Franciza tat -2 ta’ Novembru 
2005, gie impost penali kontra l -esponenti ta’ Eur 1,500 
kull gurnata.  Jirrizulta ukoll li dan l -ammont mhux 
Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 9 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja  determinat b’mod finali mill -istess  Qorti Franciza u kwindi 
l-proceduri ta’ enfurzar huma difettuzi u mankanti a bazi 
tal-fuq imsemmi Artikolu.  
 
“Inoltre, la darba r -rikorrenti ma gabu ebda prova jew 
dokumenti li juru li l -imsemmi penali gie kristallizzat ossia 
“....has been finally determi ned....” mill -Qorti Franciza 
allura issegwi li t -talba ta’ rikonoxximent u enfurzar tas -
sentenza mhijiex possibbli jew permessibbli billi r -rekwiziti 
ghall -enfurzar mhumiex sodisfatti kif rikjest mir -Regomenti 
44/2001 ta’ l -Unjoni Ewropeja.  
 
“Illi sussidja rjament u bla pregudizzju ghall -premess, l -
esponenti jirreferu ghall -Artikolu 37(1) tar -Regolamenti 
44/2001 ta’ l -Unjoni Wropeja li jghid hekk:  
 
“A court of a Member State in which recognition is sought 
of a judgement given in another Member State may stay  
the proceedings if an ordinary appeal against the 
judgement has been lodged.  
 
L-esponenti josserva li r -rikorrenti naqset taghti kull 
informazzjoni rilevanti lil dina l -Onorabbli Qorti billi naqset, 
konvenjentement, li tindika li d -decizjoni moghtija mill -
Qorti Franciza tat -2 ta’ Novembru 2005 giet appellata mill -
esponenti, liema appell ghadu pendenti sallum.  (Dok X1 
– l-appell interpost mill -esponenti verzjoni Franciza; Dol 
X2 – risposta ghall -appell mir -rikorrenti)  
 
“Illi ghalkemm l -Artikolu 32 ta’ l -imsemmija Regolamenti 
44/2001 ta’ l -Unjoni Ewropeja ma jitlobx il -htiega li s -
sentenza, li taghha qieghed tintalab li tigi enfurzata, tkun 
“res gudikata” pero` il -fatt li s -sentenza qieghda pendenti 
appell, l -Artikolu 37(1) tar -Regolamenti 44/2001 ta’ l -
Unjoni Ewropeja jaghti l -fakolta ossia diskrezzjoni lill -Qrati 
li tissospendi (“stay the proceedings”) il -proceduri odjerni 
minhabba dan l -appell pendenti.  
 
“Illi sussidjarjament u bla pregudizzju ghall -premess, ir -
referenza maghmula mir -rikorrenti fil -paragra fu 21 tar -
rikors promotorju u cioe` r -referenza ghall -proceduri ghall -
enfurzar ta’ sentenza barranija ohra kontra Zeturf Limited 
Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 10 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja  issahhah l -argumenti legali esposti mill -esponenti u dana 
billi minn ezami ta’ l -istess dokumenti jirrizulta li s -
sentenza li t aghha intalbet ir -rikonoxximent u enfurzar 
kienet wahda mill -Qorti ta’ l -Appell Franciza u inoltre l -
ammont bhala penali kien gie determinat u kristalizzat; 
zewg elementi mankanti fil -kaz in ezami.  
 
“Ghaldaqstant l -esponenti jitolbu bir -rispett li dina l -
Onorabbli Qorti joghgobha tichad it -talba tar -rikorrenti kif 
dedotta fir -rikors promotorju ta -30 ta’ Marzu 2006, bl -
ispejjez kontra l -istess rikorrenti.”  
 
Rat id -decizjoni moghtija mill -Prim Awla tal -Qorti Civili fis -
17 ta’ April, 2006 li in forza taghha ca hdet it -talba tas -
socjeta` rikorrenti wara li kkunsidrat li kien jidher li s -
sentenza in kwistjoni giet appellata;  
 
Rat ir -rikors ta’ l -appell (tal -25 ta’ Lulju 2006) ta’ l -Avukat 
Dottor Brigitte Zammit nomine li, ghar -ragunijiet hemm 
premessi, talbet li d in il-Qorti joghgobha tirrevoka d -
decizjoni ta’ l -ewwel Qorti u tiddikjara enforzabbli f’Malta 
s-sentenza estera in kwistjoni;  
 
Rat ir -risposta tas -socjetajiet intimati li, ghar -ragunijiet 
hemm premessi, talbu c -cahda ta’ l -appell u l -konferma 
tas-sentenza  appellata.  
 
Rat l-atti kollha u d -dokumenti esebiti;  
 
Semghet lid -difensuri tal -partijiet;  
 
Ikkunsidrat;  
 
Illi b’dawn il -proceduri s -socjeta` rikorrenti qed titlob l -
esekuzzjoni gewwa pajjizna ta’ sentenza li nghatat mill -
Qorti ta’ l -Ewwel Istanza ta’ Par igi, Franza, fit -2 ta’ 
Novembru, 2005.  It -talba saret ai termini ta’ l -Artikolu 1 
tar-Regolament 44/2001 dwar il -Gurisdizzjoni u r -
Rikonoxximent u l -Infurzar ta’ sentenzi f’materja civili u 
kummercjali li jorbot lil Malta bhala membru ta’ l -Unjoni 
Ewropej a. 
 
Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 11 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja  L-ewwel Qorti cahdet it -talba tas -socjeta` rikorrenti wara li 
rat li kien tressaq appell minn dik is -sentenza ta’ l -ewwel 
Qorti Franciza, liema appell kien ghadu pendenti .  
 
Is-socjeta` rikorrenti appellat minn din id -decizjoni bl -
aggravju jkun li l -ewwel Qorti ma kellhiex poter tichad it -
talba fuq ir -raguni li s -sentenza kienet giet appellata.  
 
Tajjeb li jinghad li, fil -mori ta’ l -appell, l -appell li kien gie 
introdott kontra s -sentenza ta’ l -ewwel Qorti Franciza, gie 
deciz mill -Qorti ta’ l -Appell f’Pa rigi fl -14 ta’ Gunju, 2006.  
F’dik id -decizjoni il -Qorti ta’ l -Appell f’Parigi kkonfermat is -
sentenza li kienet inghatat mill -ewwel Qorti Franciza.  
Wara d -decizjoni tal -Qorti ta’ l -Appell f’Parigi, is -socjeta` 
rikorrenti talbet l -enforzabbilita` taghha f’ Malta, u 
b’decizjoni tat -28 ta’ Lulju, 2006, il -Prim Awla tal -Qorti 
Civili ddikjartaha enforzabbli f’Malta (minn din id -decizjoni, 
sar appell mis -socjetajiet intimati – rikors numru 224/06 – 
li gie deciz illum stess minn din il -Qorti).  
 
Is-sentenza tal -Qorti ta’ l -Appell Franciza tal -14 ta’ Gunju, 
2006, ovvjament tissupera ghal kollox l -effetti tas -
sentenza franciza meritu ta’ dan l -appell.  Il -meritu ta’ dan 
l-appell hu ghalhekk, tista’ tghid, ezawrit, pero`, minhabba 
kif zvolgew l -affarijiet, din il -Qorti  sejra xorta wahda titratta 
u tiddeciedi l -punt kontrovers, anke biex tkun tista’ 
tiddeciedi fuq l -ispejjez ta’ dawn il -proceduri.  
 
Fuq din il -kwistjoni, din il -Qorti tara li s -socjeta` appellanti 
ghandha ragun fl -aggravji taghha.  Skond l -Artikolu 38(1) 
tar-Regolament:  
“A judgment given in a Member State and enforceable in 
that state shall be enforced in another Member State, 
when on an application of any interested party, it has 
been declared enforceable there. ” 
 
Ghalhekk, sentenza moghtija in prim istanz a minn Qorti 
estera, hija enforzabbli f’Malta, anke jekk kontra dik is -
sentenza ikun gie intavolat appell u dan kemm -il darba dik 
il-Qorti estera tkun iddikjarat is -sentenza taghha 
enforzabbli .  Fil -fatt, procedura ghall -enforzar tas -
sentenza moghtija in p rim istanza, tezisti anke fl -
Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 12 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja  ordinament guridiku Malti, u parti li tigi kanonizzata 
kreditur minn Qorti ta’ prim istanza, tista’ titlob l -enforzar 
provvizorju ta’ dik is -sentenza.  Jekk it -talba tigi milqugha, 
dik is -sentenza tkun enforzabbli daqs kwalunkw e 
sentenza ohra li tkun ghaddiet in gudikat.  
 
Issa, f’dan il -kaz, il -Qorti ta’ l -ewwel istanza f’Parigi 
iddikjarat is -sentenza taghha bhala enforzabbli, u kwindi l -
fatt li kien gie intavolat appell minn dik is -sentenza, ma 
kellu jkun ta’ ebda ostakolu ghal l-enforzar taghha.  
 
Kif qalet din il -Qorti fil -kawza deciza llum stess fl -ismijiet 
“GIE Pari Mutuel Urbain v. Zeturf Ltd,” (rikors numru 
82/07), Qorti ta’ Prim Istanza mitluba biex tapplika r -
Regolament 44/2001, trid tissodisfa ruhha li dak li qed tigi 
mitluba tenforza hi “sentenza” li titratta materja civili jew 
kummercjali, u li gew sodisfatti l -kondizzjonijet imposti fl -
Artikolu 53 tar -Regolament.  Indagini ulterjuri m’ghandux 
isir mill -ewwel Qorti u dan kif rikjest mill -Artikolu 41 ta’ l -
istess Regolame nt. 
 
L-artikolu 37(1) tar -Regolament jaghti fakolta` lill -Qorti 
tissospendi il -proceduri ghar -rikonoxximent ta’ sentenza 
estera (“stay the proceedings”), f’kaz li jkun gie interpost 
appell ordinarju mis -sentenza, pero`, mhux li tichad it -
talba ghall -enfurz ar. 
 
Kwindi, d -decizjoni ta’ l -ewwel Qorti in kwantu cahdet it -
talba tas -socjeta` rikorrenti minhabba l -pendenza ta’ 
appell, mhux konformi mar -Regolament in kwistjoni.  
 
Din il -Qorti ma tistax, pero`, tordna l -esekuzzjoni hawn 
Malta tas -sentenza ta’ l -ewwel  Qorti Franciza mhux biss 
ghax l -effetti ta’ dik is -sentenza gew superati bis -sentenza 
konformi tal -Qorti ta’ l -Appell f’Parigi, izda wkoll ghax kif 
gie deciz illum stess minn din il -Qorti fil -kawza ghall -
inforzar tas -sentenza tal -Qorti ta’ l -Appell f’Pari gi dik is -
sentenza mhux ezegwibbli hawn Malta peress li fir -realta` 
dik is -sentenza taqa’ fl -ambitu tad -dritt pubbliku u 
ghalhekk hija espressament eskluza mill -operat tar -
Regolament 44/2001 in vista ta’ dak li jipprovdi l -Artikolu 
1(1) ta’ l -istess Regola ment.  
Kopja Informali ta' Sentenza  
Pagna 13 minn 13 
Qrati tal -Gustizzja   
Ghaldaqstant, ghar -ragunijiet premessi (u mhux ghal 
dawk imhaddna mill -ewwel QortiI), tiddisponi mill -appell 
interpost mis -socjeta` rikorrenti, billi tichad l -istess u 
tikkonferma d -decizjoni appellata.  
 
L-ispejjez ta’ dawn il -proceduri, inkluz dawk  ta’ prim 
istanza, fic -cirkostanzi jithallsu nofs kull wiehed mill -
partijiet.  
 
 
 
< Sentenza Finali >  
 
--------------------------------- TMIEM ---------------------------------