A Maltese court has refused to enforce a $740 million US defamation judgment against Ugur Tatlici. The decision highlights the growing European resistance to what critics call the weaponization of foreign courts.
The Civil Court, First Hall of Malta, rejected an enforcement request tied to a Florida ruling that ordered Ugur Tatlici to pay his stepbrother, Mehmet Tatlici, one of the largest defamation awards on record. The Maltese judge cited concerns over proportionality and procedural fairness.
A Florida ruling under scrutiny
The original case, filed in Florida, centered on allegations by Mehmet Tatlici that Ugur Tatlici had published defamatory material against him. The US court issued its judgment in absentia without Ugur Tatlici or his legal representatives present to contest the claims.
Lawyers have noted several unusual aspects of the case. The award amount, $740 million, far exceeds typical defamation penalties in Europe. Both brothers are Turkish citizens, and the alleged harm occurred in Turkey.
Allegations of fraud surface in Turkey
Separate legal proceedings in Turkey have since brought forward claims that the US judgment may have been based on fabricated evidence. Court documents and witness statements obtained in Turkey suggest the existence of forged documents, false testimony, and references to a real estate project that never existed.
According to these filings, Mehmet Tatlici and his associates are accused of presenting misleading financial assessments and perjured testimony to US judges and juries. If substantiated, these allegations could cast doubt on the integrity of the original ruling.
Malta’s stance on legal overreach
Maltese Judge, in his ruling, emphasized public order concerns and the disproportionate nature of the US award. The decision effectively signals that European courts will not automatically recognize foreign judgments that fail to meet national standards of the domestic laws and fairness and proportionality.
The ruling also noted that Mehmet Tatlici’s legal team appeared to be aware of the controversial nature of the US judgment abd the case may have been pursued as a means to pressure or silence an opponent.
A test for Turkey’s legal system
The Maltese decision sets a precedent for how European courts may handle similar cases in the future. Attention now turns to Turkey, where Ugur Tatlici has also challenged the enforcement of the US judgment.
While Mehmet Tatlici sought to enforce a multimillion-dollar judgment against his stepbrother, he simultaneously applied for legal aid in Turkey and asked for financial hardship.
Turkish courts must decide whether to uphold the US ruling or follow the Maltese approach.