A licensed bar owner was held criminally responsible for breaches committed on his premises after failing to register a substitute licensee.
Court of Magistrates (Malta) as a Court of Criminal Judicature · Magistrate Dr. Donatella M. Frendo Dimech LL.D., Mag. Jur. (Int. Law) · 05 May 2026
In the early hours of 21 May 2025, at around 1:00 a.m., police officers inspected Hot Ice Snack Bar in Paceville, St Julian's, after hearing loud music clearly audible from outside the premises. Upon entry, they found two individuals — MD Rahat Hassan and Adnan Chowdhury — serving customers behind the bar. Neither was registered as a substitute for the licence holder, Steve Grima. Grima, the licensed owner of Hot Ice Bar, had entered into a lease agreement with Oriental BD Limited, effectively handing over day-to-day operations. However, he never registered a substitute licensee with the regulatory authority as required by law, leaving a gap of nearly two months — since 25 March 2025 — without any registered substitute. The court noted that Grima had previously registered substitutes when he wished to, demonstrating he was fully aware of the legal requirement and capable of fulfilling it. The prosecution's case was bolstered by the lease contract itself, which Grima produced in his own defence. The document showed that Grima retained extensive control over the establishment through numerous clauses, and crucially, it was Grima himself — not the lessee company — who registered Hassan and Chowdhury as substitutes the very day after the police inspection. The court found this telling: the lessee, a legal entity, could not have family members as occupiers nor appoint a substitute, further confirming that responsibility remained with Grima alone. On the second charge, Grima argued that no expert was brought to measure the decibel level of the music. The court dismissed this as absurd, noting that the law prohibits music being audible outside the premises regardless of volume — even a whisper would suffice. The police affidavit clearly stated that music was 'clearly heard from outside the premises,' and Grima's legal team did not cross-examine the officer on this point. The court also noted that the establishment was not even licensed to play music at all, making the breach even more serious. The court found Grima guilty on both charges. Citing the Criminal Court of Appeal's precedent in Police vs Anthony Camilleri, the magistrate affirmed that a licensee cannot escape criminal responsibility by transferring operations to a third party when the law does not grant that right. Grima was fined €1,000. The court declined to apply Article 30 of the Criminal Code — which would have disqualified him from holding a licence — noting that the music stopped immediately upon police orders and that Grima had no prior similar violations.
Steve Grima found guilty on both charges. Sentenced to pay a fine of €1,000. The court declined to apply Article 30 of the Criminal Code (licence disqualification), citing the immediate cessation of music upon police orders and the absence of prior similar violations.
Criminal Code Ch. 9, Arts. 17, 30, 31; Regulation 21, Shops (Sale of Wine, Beer or Spirits) (Licences, Good Order and Public Decency) Regulations L.S.10.9; Regulation 6(4)(c), Business Hours (Regulations) L.S.441.08