Legal Remedies for Bad Workmanship: Which One Is Right for You?

Bad workmanship by a contractor (‘appaltatur’) is a common issue that frequently lands before the Maltese courts. Despite its regular occurrence, the law does not offer a one-size-fits-all remedy. Instead, it provides a flexible framework based on general principles of contract and obligations law.

This article explores the most relevant remedies available when work falls short of expected workmanship and skills standards, and how to determine which is best suited to each situation.

Breach of Contractually Agreed Quality – Rejecting the Works or Adjusting the Price

Article 1390 of the Civil Code provides that:

“If the thing which the seller offers to deliver is not of the quality promised, or is not according to the sample on which the sale was made, the buyer may elect either to reject the thing and demand damages, or to accept the thing with a diminution of the price upon a valuation by experts.”

Although this article specifically addresses the sale of goods, Maltese courts have consistently applied it by analogy to contracts of work.

This remedy provides two distinct paths, with the available course of action hinging on the injured party’s initial response. If the injured party accepts the work, their sole recourse is to request a price reduction proportional to the defects. Conversely, if the injured party rejects the work, they may pursue rescission of the contract, which releases them from payment obligations and allows them to claim damages, provided the work is returned unless doing so is physically impossible. The Court of Appeal, in John Mary Dalli nomine vs Grezzju Patiniott, decided on the 19th of May 2000, affirmed that the alternative avenues are not interchangeable and depend on the injured party’s immediate reaction. A party cannot keep the work while simultaneously refusing payment and demanding better results - you must choose your remedy early and act consistently. Similarly, one may keep the work whilst claiming damages.

Monetary Compensation for Faulty Standards of Skill or Workmanship

Where a contractor fails to meet expected standards, a claim may also be made under the broader rules on the effects of obligations in the Civil Code.

Under Article 1125, often construed together with Article 1133, a contractor who fails to properly fulfil their obligations (whether by incomplete work, late delivery, or substandard quality) may be liable in damages, even without bad faith.

In contrast to the avenue of default in contracted quality, provided under Article 1390,  the right to claim damages is independent of other remedies sought for the same bad workmanship, as it is considered an independent right to damages. This was most recently confirmed by the Court of Appeal’s ruling in Karen Camilleri vs Emanuel Grech (decided on the 8th of May 2025).

Compensated damages typically cover the value of remedial works required to correct the defects, and other damages that directly and immediately result from the faulty work. If fraud or bad faith is involved, the scope of recoverable damages may be broader, as long as a direct causal link is proven.

In addition, Article 1127 allows the injured party to rectify the faults themselves (or hire someone else to do so), and charge the cost to the defaulting contractor in addition to damages sought, a useful option when one seeks remedial works as a remedy but does not trust the same contractor to fulfil such a task.

Poor Workmanship as Breach of Resolutive Condition: Claiming Remedial Action or Termination of the Contract

A contractor’s failure to deliver quality work is also seen as a breach of an implied resolutive condition under Article 1069 of the Civil Code. The premise of a resolutive condition is that the occurrence of an event, in this case the provision of substandard works, is a legal ground for contractual termination. The Court of Appeal recognised this principle in its judgment delivered on the 29th April 2016 in the names Mario Difesa et vs Jesmond Micallef et, confirming that good workmanship is an implied condition of any contract of work.

A serious failure to meet this condition gives rise to specific remedies:

The first is that of demanding the dissolution of the contract, extinguishing all obligations under it. The second is that of compelling the contractor to perform their obligation by remedying the fault in the works produced.

Both remedies may be combined with a claim for damages grounded in the same remedy, offering flexibility depending on how the injured party wishes to proceed.

Final Thoughts

Maltese law offers a wide array of legal responses to bad workmanship - from rescinding the contract, to reducing the price, to claiming compensation or requiring rectification. The ideal remedy depends on several factors:

• How did you respond initially?
• What result are you seeking?
• How much time has passed?

While these distinctions may seem overly technical to someone simply trying to obtain justice, choosing the correct legal avenue from the outset is critical. The wrong choice - or delay - may limit your options or affect the outcome of your case.