司法系统在债务执行和破产中的作用：马耳他（英）

The Role of the JusticeSystem in DebtEnforcement andInsolvency Natalia Stetsenko and Atticus Weller SIP/2026/021 IMF Selected Issues Papers are prepared by IMF staff asbackground documentation for periodic consultations withmember countries.It is based on the information available at 2026MAR IMF Selected Issues Paper European Department The Role of the Justice System in Debt Enforcement and Insolvency, MaltaPrepared by Natalia Stetsenko and Atticus Weller* Authorized for distribution by Nick Gigineishvili IMF Selected Issues Papersare prepared by IMF staff as background documentation for periodicconsultations with member countries.It is based on the information available at the time it was ABSTRACT:This paper examines how Malta’s justice system impacts the efficiency of debt enforcement andinsolvency proceedings, with implications for credit allocation and business and investment environment.Drawing on cross-country benchmarking, institutional diagnostics, and recent reforms, it identifies structuralbottlenecks—particularly case backlogs, procedural inefficiencies and capacity constraints—that hinder timely RECOMMENDED CITATION:Stetsenko, Natalia; Weller, Atticus, 2026, “The Role of the Justice System inDebt Enforcement and Insolvency, Malta,” Selected Issues Paper 2026/021. SELECTED ISSUES PAPERS The Role of the Justice System inDebt Enforcement and InsolvencyMalta Prepared by Natalia Stetsenko and Atticus Weller THE ROLE OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN DEBT Malta’s labor-driven growth model appears to be reaching its limits, underscoring the need for astrategic pivot toward productivity-driven growth. Among the factors hampering the business andcredit environment are longstanding excessive delays and inefficiencies in the judicial system, whichconstrain lending and investment. This Selected Issues Paper discusses institutional and capacity A.Background/Context 1.Malta’s judicial system facespersistent challenges that affect its overallefficiency.The effective functioning of thejudiciary has been undermined by chronicunderstaffing, court infrastructure and casemanagement deficiencies, and oftenburdensome and outdated procedural rules. instance of 454 days in 2023 – a decrease from 491 days in 2022 though still well above the EUaverage.23The number of resolved cases across all jurisdictions remains low4contributing togrowing backlogs. Malta’s clearance rate – resolved cases relative to incoming cases – is below theEU median. While the official statistics do not allow a focused assessment of credit enforcement 2.Lengthy court processes contribute to business and financial risks. In general, longdelays in debt recovery and low recovery rates tend to result in significant uncertainties forbusinesses and credit providers, contributing to cash flow and liquidity problems as companies wait payments. These inefficiencies make lenders more cautious, resulting in higher collateral demands,increased interest rates, and reduced access to credit, especially for smaller and riskier enterprises(Qian and Strahan, 2007; Bae and Goyal, 2009). Another related consequence is the impact ondomestic and foreign investment, as businesses are reluctant to extend credit or pursue growth 3.Cross-country studies show positive growth and investment spillovers from judicialefficiency reforms.Portugal undertook significant judicial reforms between 2011 and 2013,introducing new civil procedures and organizing courts into clusters to improve efficiency (Pompeand Bergthaler; 2016;6Pereira and Wemans, 2018). These changes cut the disposition time in firstinstance courts from around 400 days to 200 days and increased investment and productivity at thefirm level. Slovakia’s reforms from 2012 to 2016 focused on quality and transparency, establishing a 4.Malta’s economy and business climate would benefit from further strengthening ofjudicial institutions and modernization of court processes.A timely, predictable and efficientcommercial dispute resolution and credit enforcement system is vital to credit decisions and overallbusiness confidence.This SIP focuses on the key obstacles that impede the efficient operation of the Source: CEPEJ B.Institutional Issues 5.Malta has a two-tier judicial system with the courts divided into superior and inferiorjurisdictions.Superior courts include the Civil Court, Criminal Court, Court of Appeal, Criminal Courtof Appeal, and the Constitutional Court and are presided over by judges. Inferior courts are presidedover by magistrates and include the Court of Magistrates (Malta) and the Court of Magistrates 6.TheMaltese general court system has been historically characterized by understaffing,lack of judicial specialization, and poor court infrastructure. While various reform initiatives havebeen put in place over the last few years to strengthen judicial institutions, bottlenecks persist.Reform measures include increasing the number of judges and court staff, boosting judicial Notwithstanding