Brothers challenge police commissioner over father’s workplace death

Three brothers are challenging the police commissioner in court in a fight to hold a company accountable for their father’s untimely death.

Carmnu Micallef, their father, lost his life while carrying out a work duty in Birżebbuġa. Charges have been brought against his co-worker for involuntary homicide, but Micallef’s sons argue that the company should also take responsibility for his death.

The incident goes back to 2022, when the 71-year-old man was helping his colleague, Davide Manunta, manoeuvre through a narrow street in Wied il-Qoton. The two men were delivering steel mesh to a private residence at the time of the incident.

However, Manunta accidentally reversed the company vehicle onto Micallef. When the police arrived on site, they certified him dead on the spot.

Manunta is facing charges of involuntary homicide and negligent driving but pleaded not guilty.

But for the Micallef brothers, the company that Manunta and their father were working for should also shoulder responsibility for the accident.

The brothers are pursuing legal action to compel the police commissioner to take action against G&P Borg, the company their father was working for at the time of his death.

Their argument hinges on the belief that this was a workplace accident, and not just a traffic accident, because it happened during working hours and involved the use of a company vehicle.

The family’s lawyer had previously argued in court that the incident should have been reported to the OHSA since it happened during working hours. Since the incident was classified as a traffic accident, there is no grounds for proceedings against G&P Borg.

In the police commissioner’s initial response to the brother’s challenge, he maintains that the magisterial inquiry conducted at the time recommended action against the driver, not the company.

Furthermore, he contends that the accident, regardless of the victim’s occupational status or the vehicle involved, should be deemed a road accident.

“If there was a third person around to help the driver manoeuvre, that person might have ended up being the victim. In that case, that person wouldn’t be able to rely on health and safety laws; it would be classified as a road accident,” the commissioner said in his response.

The legal tussle raises questions about the interpretation of Maltese health and safety regulations. According to these regulations, any accident connected to work resulting in the death or major injury of an individual should be treated as a notifiable accident, requiring reporting to the Occupational Health and Safety Authority (OHSA).

The family have already filed Constitutional proceedings related to the case, arguing that the formula used by Malta’s courts to calculate civil damages is discriminatory towards the elderly.

The courts long used the criteria established in the 1967 landmark Butler v Heard judgment by the Court of Appeal. In calculating the damages due, the court takes into account the age of the individual, the wage that he was earning at the time of incident in question and the percentage of disability, as determined by medical experts. Damages are normally calculated up till retirement age.

The use of this formula will limit the amount in damages that the family will be able to receive - if any.

The application asks the court to declare that the applicants will suffer a breach of their fundamental rights under the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights if the Butler vs Heard formula is used to quantify the damages they can receive and grant an “effective and adequate” remedy in the circumstances.

The court case is set to commence on 14 November.