In his words: A judge’s damning indictment of the Steward and Vitals deal

Mr Justice Francesco Depasquale delivered a damning ruling on the hospitals deal. Here are some of his most scathing remarks from the sitting.

The €100 million buy-out clause: “Possibly criminal”

The judge says Steward had forced the government to change the agreement to make the government in default if the contract failed. The judge questioned how the government allowed itself to get into this position, suggesting that Steward's actions were "possibly criminal".

This was the result of fraud by Steward to change an agreement entered into through fraud by its predecessor, to end up enriching itself on the back of the Maltese taxpayer. The judge describes Steward's machinations as "solely blackmail and unjustified enrichment".

Vitals and the MoU: “Evidence of its fraudulent intent”

Between the memorandum and the granting of the concession, Vitals should have disclosed this conflict, which would have rendered it ineligible. "The fact that Vitals kept the MoU hidden was evidence of its fraudulent intent," said the judge.

He states: Vitals had abused its position and took advantage of the government, which was already politically bound to deliver the hospitals it promised before the elections.

READ ALSOJudge annuls hospitals deal, slams Vitals, Steward and government in damning ruling

The concession milestones: “A complete farce”

As Depasquale reads out the concession milestones that had to be fulfilled, he remarks: “It emerges that none of these completion milestones were observed or achieved by Vitals, today Steward.”

"They were rendered ineffective, if not a complete farce," says the judge on the milestones, as the secret side-agreements showed. “The government of Malta, instead of defending the interests of the Maltese people,... incredibly accepted a change to the agreement," said the judge.

From Vitals to Steward: “Serious doubt on Steward’s good faith”

“The glaring failure of the Steward companies to try to justify the their position and defend their insistence that there was no breach of the contractual obligations on their part, leads the Court to seriously doubt Steward’s good faith [and intention] to honour the agreement and the obligations imposed on it and freely assumed by it at the moment that it acquired the shares of Vitals on 16 February 2018, as well as raising serious doubts about the honesty and good faith of the same Steward when they entered into the 27 August 2019 the agreement where the Government bound itself to pay it a penalty of one hundred million Euros in the event that the Court, as composed, declared the contracts that had been awarded to Vitals, and which it had failed than to honour, as void.”

READ ALSOGovernment's dry reaction after judge shreds hospitals contract

Government’s due diligence: “Amateurish checks”

Depasquale goes on to slam government’s “amateurish” checks before signing the contract.

In the RFP there is absolutely no request for due diligence on the proposers, which the court says indicates that there was no intention to actually evaluate the proposals.

The judge is convinced that this was part of a complex and concerted effort to deceive and strong-arm the authorities into accepting the proposal.

READ ALSOAdrian Delia after court annuls Steward hospitals deal - ‘Malta won. Good prevailed’

Konrad Mizzi: "Changes only to the benefit of Vitals and Steward"

“Such a doubt, this Court observes, should also have been raised by everyone who was involved in order to protect the rights of the Government of Malta and which was originally included in the agreement, and this also includes Dr. Konrad Mizzi, both when he was Minister of Energy, Health and Projects at the time that the original agreement was signed, and even more so when, even though he was no longer Minister of Health, he signed various other agreements that amended the original contract, and knowingly revoked and reduced rights which the Government had -changes which were made only for the benefit of Vitals as well as Steward, and certainly not to the benefit of the Government and the citizen, who was supposed to ultimately reap the benefits from the projects entrusted to Steward and which they had failed to see to completion.”