Court accepts challenge proceedings instituted by family members of man killed in freak truck incident
Proceedings had been instituted against deceased’s employer, G&P Borg Limited

A request instituted by family members of a man who died after being crushed by a truck whilst at work for the Police be ordered to institute criminal action against employees of G&P Borg Limited was accepted by a Court on Tuesday.
Karmnu Micallef, 71, was certified dead after being squeezed by the vehicle as he was aiding a colleague manoeuvre through a narrow street. The incident had taken place in Birzebbuga, with experts later certifying that the truck in question was inadequate for such a narrow road.
Micallef had been hit numerous times before the driver realised what had happened.
Martin Micallef, Godwin Micallef and Christian Paul Micallef instituted ‘challenge’ proceedings against the Commissioner of Police, which proceedings are utilised in criminal law so that it may be determined on a prima facie basis whether a ‘notitia criminis’ (such as a complaint or ‘kwerela’) should result in the taking of effective criminal action against persons identified therein.

The applicants, in their application, noted that the incident had been classified by the Police as a mere traffic accident, so much so that the truck driver, Davide Manuta, was later charged with the involuntary homicide of Micallef.
They argued that the contents of the magisterial inquiry indicated that such an accident also concerned health and safety legislation, and that notwithstanding their ‘kwerela’ (complaint), no action had been taken by the Commissioner of Police.
The Commissioner of Police replied by stating that the complaint had not been sent to the Police, but rather to the Health and Safety Authority. It was also argued that relevant action had been instituted according to the findings of the magisterial inquiry and that the incident in question was indeed a traffic incident.
During proceedings, the Court heard the testimony of the victim’s son, Martin Micallef, who recalled that his father had been employed by G&P Borg Limited and that he and Manuta were tasked with delivering a load of rebar on the day of the incident. It resulted that the truck provided by G&P Borg Limited was inadequate given the narrowness of the road, with this contributing to the events leading to the death of his father. It was claimed that insofar as the truck was inadequate, the employer should have provided a different vehicle.
The Court noted that from the conclusions of the inquiry, it was recommended that action pertaining to reckless driving be taken against Manuta , and that the inquiry did not delve into the responsibility, or lack thereof, of G&P Borg Limited which had provided the truck.
It also held that from the evidence submitted, it appeared that no investigations had been made regarding the complaint submitted, with the Police relying on the contents of the inquiry which focused on Manuta. It was remarked that the fact that the inquiry did not analyse the responsibility of G&P Borg Limited did not preclude the ability of the Police to investigate the complaint.
REAS ALSO: Vittmi tal-Kostruzzjoni | Karmenu Micallef
The Court ultimately accepted the plea, declaring that there is a prima facie basis for the complaint.
The applicants were represented by lawyer Franco Galea.