Court throws out waterpolo Ben Plumpton’s injuction bid against 12-match ban

By Edwina Brincat

San Ġiljan ASC player Ben Plumpton’s request to stop a 12-match ban was dismissed by court on grounds that he failed to show how he would suffer irremediable prejudice by missing out on the matches.

The ban was imposed by the Aquatic Sports Association’s Board of Appeals following a report by rival club Sliema ASC that the player had bitten two of its players during a match on July 17. The ASA originally imposed a four-match ban, which was tripled on appeal.

Plumpton took the matter before the civil courts where his lawyers argued that the ASA’s appeals board acted beyond its powers. The ASA defended its board and also pleaded that Plumpton’s court action was premature as he had not exhausted all avenues open to him before seeking the injunction.

In a decree on Tuesday, Madam Justice Josette Demicoli declared that, at this stage, the court would not delve into the issue as to whether the board of appeal acted beyond its powers and scope. To do so would be touching upon the merits of the case.

The right which Plumpton expected to safeguard and how that right translated into legal claims was “not at all clear”, observed the court.

Moreover, the court was faced with two conflicting versions as to what happened before the board of appeal. Plumpton had failed to prove that “what he alleged had actually taken place”.

He had also failed to show how missing out on matches would, in itself, translate into personal irremediable prejudice, said the court.

Citing caselaw on the subject, the judge observed that the necessity of an injunction implied “something more than discomfort or difficulty”. An applicant must prove that kind of prejudice which could not be remedied except by means of an injunction. Plumpton had failed to prove that prejudice, said the court, rejecting his request with costs.

Lawyer Herman Mula is assisting the ASA.

Lawyers Charles Mercieca, Carlos Bugeja and Ismael Vella are assisting Plumpton.