Court revokes casino injunction

A court has rejected the request made by Dragonara Gaming Limited for a warrant of prohibitory injunction against the awarding of the government concession to operate a casino to Eden Leisure Group.

Judge Joseph R. Micallef revoked the previous provisional warrant granted by the court on the grounds that, while it had been sufficiently proven that Dragonara had a legitimate interest and concern, the necessity for the injunction had not been proven to the satisfaction of the court.

“The element of necessity is tied to the fact that the action complained of could not be remedied by other means after the merits of the case are investigated by the court,” said the judge.

The judge noted that the law provides Dragonara a choice of judicial remedies that it could use to protect its rights but that “the warrant requested, however is not one of them.”

The court noted that the concession process had not reached a stage where decisions taken could not be reversed, adding that if it the concerns voiced by Dragonara were to actually materialise, the remedy would be the cancellation of the bidding process.

The aspect of proportionality was also adjudged to be lacking as the possible damage suffered by the defendent were the injunction to be granted outweighs the possible damage to the plaintiff were it not.

The court, however, emphasised that this revocation should not be interpreted as a carte blanche for the other parties, who include the Minister of Finance, the ministry for the economy, investment and small enterprises and the Privatisation Unit, pointing out that the possibility of reversal “also applies to whoever may construe the court’s decision not to issue the injunction as a ‘general absolution’ allowing him to do as he pleases.

Neither does the decision mean that what has already taken place cannot be investigated again in the correct forum and using the correct procedures”.

Dragonara Gaming, which also holds a 10-year concession on the Dragonara Casino in St Julian’s, had applied for the injunction in late October, alleging flaws in the process which resulted in the proposal submitted by Eden Leisure Group being selected as the preferred bid for a new casino concession.

The company had contested the decision by the Privatisation Unit, claiming its up-front cash offer was three times that offered by Eden Leisure.