Judge affirms ruling in Alessandro Lia car transfer fraud case, calls for calligraphy test






A judge upheld a decision ordering charges against lawyer Alessandro Lia over suspected complicity in car transfer fraud, clarifying this does not imply guilt but is necessary due to incomplete police investigations.


The case involves a Renault Megane once owned by Lia’s father-in-law, Victor Sant, with Lia suggesting it be scrapped during a family discussion.


Lia offered to handle the task for his father, and later informed him that all he managed to get for the scrap material was €100. However, when Sant subsequently checked with Transport Malta, he discovered that the car had actually been transferred to someone else rather than being scrapped. Sant insisted that he had never signed a declaration form for such a transfer to be done and claimed that the signature on the relative document presented to Transport Malta was not his. 


Sant initiated legal proceedings challenging the Police Commissioner to take criminal action against Lia. In September, the Magistrates’ Court ruled in favour of the challenge, noting that while Lia did not profit financially, there were prima facie grounds for prosecution.


The alleged falsification of documents could only be verified by a court-appointed calligraphy expert during criminal proceedings. The Police Commissioner appealed the magistrate’s decision, seeking its reversal. 


Sant’s lawyers argued the Attorney General’s appeal, filed on behalf of the commissioner, was late. However, the Criminal Court rejected this claim, noting that while legal time limits were to be “scrupulously” respected, the delay was not the AG’s fault but resulted from the late transmission of the case records by the court.


The court noted that challenge proceedings act as a judicial review to assess whether police inaction on a reported crime is justified. It found prima facie evidence of Lia’s suspected complicity, citing his alleged role in providing a copy of the owner’s ID for the vehicle transfer.  


While Lia’s email to the insurance company indicated the car’s transfer, Sant’s court testimony raised doubts about the AG’s claim that Sant was aware of the transfer rather than its scrapping. Sant maintained he never signed the transfer documents, despite being copied in Lia’s email. The transfer occurred the following day.  It was also noted that no calligraphy test was done to eliminate Lia’s suspected involvement in that transfer.


Judge Neville Camilleri affirmed the First Court’s ruling, saying that the suspected signature falsification could only be determined through a calligraphy test in criminal proceedings.


The court stated that since the police had failed to conduct the required examinations during their investigation, Lia’s involvement could only be excluded through the criminal process. It found no reason to overturn the initial court's decision, emphasising that this conclusion was reached solely on a prima facie basis, relying on the court records.


“In no way was this court implying some form of guilt by Dr Lia in respect of charges to be pressed against him,” the court clarified, directing that both judgments be served “immediately” upon the Police Commissioner for the necessary action.


Sant was represented by Lawyers Franco Debono and Edward Gatt.  






Ads Links by Easy Branches
Play online games for free at games.easybranches.com

Guest Post Services www.easybranches.com/contribute