Quarry owners escape €10,000 fine for using substandard diesel

The owners of a quarry in Dingli, who had been fined €10,000 for distributing fuel that was not in line with legal requirements have been cleared on appeal, after a court described the evidence against them as “lame and inadmissible.”

The quarry directors: Gaetano, Manweli, Joseph and Carmelo Abdilla had been charged in 2012 after an on-site inspection by the Malta Resources Authority (MRA).

During the inspection, samples had been taken from the fuel tank of a supply truck used at the quarry.

Results of chemical testing on those samples, carried out at a Kalafrana laboratory appointed by the MRA, had shown that the sulphur content in the diesel was above legal limits. 

The quarry owners had told the authorities that they alwyas bought their fuel from legitimate and well-known licensed vendors, exhibiting receipts for the fuel purchases.

Despite this all four directors were found guilty by a court of Magistrates in 2015 and fined €10,000 over the diesel. 

The four had filed an appeal, their lawyers arguing that there would be a “gross injustice” if end-users, like the appellants, were to be placed “at the mercy” of fuel distributors. Consumers did not have the technical knowledge and equipment required to analyze the fuel’s sulphur content themselves. 

In addition to this, the lawyers argued that there were “serious doubts” about the methods employed in the testing of the samples. 

The Court of Criminal Appeal, presided over by Madam Justice Edwina Grima, saw how the samples had initially been tested at a local laboratory engaged by the MRA, observing that there was no evidence to prove their chain of custody. 

18 months later, another court expert was appointed to conduct more tests, sending the samples to Pozzallo, then Syracuse and ultimately to a laboratory in Naples. 

The judge saw how the samples had been handled by various persons, with no control over the chain of custody. In addition to this, the foreign scientists had not been identified and were not appointed by the court. 

Having seen this, the court ruled that the evidence provided by the forensic tests was “lame and inadmissible,” and insufficient to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court overturned the first judgment and declared the appellants to be innocent. 

Lawyers David Camilleri and Joseph Gatt assisted the Abdillas.