Court flags Labour MP’s conflict of interest to Commission for Administration of Justice

An Appeals Court has called on the Commission for the Administration of Justice to carry out an investigation into allegations of a conflict of interest by lawyer and Labour MP Luciano Busuttil in the adjudication of a local council tender.

In its judgement, the court, presided by Chief Justice Silvio Camilleri and two other judges, ordered that a tender for the collection of domestic waste be declared null and void after a rival company had its bid rejected on Busuttil’s legal advice.

In its writ filed against the Cospicua Local Council and Director of Contracts Saviour Mifsud, the plaintiff - WM Environmental Ltd - claimed that even though it submitted the cheapest offer, the local council turned down their offer against Busuttil’s advice – a bone of contention for WM which claimed that Busuttil had a “conflict of interest” as he happened to be the lawyer of the winning bidder.

The court heard that in January 2014, the Cospicua local council issued a call for tenders for the collection of domestic waste. Among its requirements, the tender offer requested bidders to submit an ETC certificate indicating the number and details of employees to be assigned to this contract.

The cheapest offer was disqualified because it did not contain a proper bid bond, while the second cheapest offer – that submitted by WM Environmental Ltd. – was also turned down after the council claimed that the company failed include the details of the company’s employees.

Instead, the tender was awarded to the third cheapest bidder, Saviour Mifsud.

The plaintiff said that the local council’s decision was taken on advice of its lawyer Luciano Busuttil.

In an appeal before the Board of Revision, WM argued that the adjudicating process should be declared null because it had included the ETC certificates, and that upon opening of the tenders received, the contracting authority did not flag any missing documentation.

Moreover, WM claimed that after further investigation, it discovered that Luciano Busuttil is also the lawyer of the winning bidder in another case.

"It is evident that there is a blatant conflict of interest in this case considering that our offer was rejected following legal advice provided by Dr Luciano Busuttil," the company argued.

Nevertheless, the appeals’ board turned down the appeal because it failed to include the relevant documentation, and subsequently, the company filed an appeal in court this July.

In its submissions, the local council said it did not notice the missing documentation when the tender was submitted, but only when it was opened. Moreover, it held that WM’s allegation that someone within the council had removed the documents in question, was “false and defamatory.”

The court, presided over by Mr Justice Noel Cuschieri and Mr Justice Giannino Caruana Demajo, said that if the local council had really noticed the missing documentation, it would have been immediately noticed.

In its decision, the appeals’ court upheld the appeal and annulled the award of the tender to Saviour Mifsud, and ordered that the adjudication process starts afresh.

Moreover, the court said that it would not be carrying its duties if it failed to express its worry at the claims made by WM about Luciano Busuttil’s conflict of interest.

Therefore, it ordered that a copy of the judgment be delivered to the Attorney General, the Director of Contracts and the Council for the Administration of Justice for the necessary investigations to be carried out.