Canon law says that it can be done anywhere, but requires a valid liturgy to do so.
Canon law says that the bread and wine must both be present and consecrated for a valid consecration.
Given that it was consecrated for a typica, that’s fine. Knowing that the Maronite Quorbono does consecrate both species, there’s no abuse there. However, the maronites do not normally use the loaf, but flat hosts, from what I’ve read. But that’s not an abuse…
Now, looking at the CCEO (Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches. Using Gray’s translation
Canon 707 - §1. The preparation of the Eucharistic bread, the prayers performed by the priests before the Divine Liturgy, the observance of the Eucharistic fast, liturgical vestments, the time and place of the celebration and other like matters must be precisely established by the norms of each Church sui iuris.
§2. For a just cause and having removed any astonishment on the part of the Christian faithful, it is permissible to use the liturgical vestments and bread of another Church sui iuris.
Since the Typica falls under the provisions of canon 709…
Canon 709 - §1. The priest distributes the Divine Eucharist or if the particular law of his own Church sui iuris establishes it, also the deacon.
§2. The synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church or the council of hierarchs is free to establish appropriate norms, according to which other Christian faithful can distribute the Divine Eucharist.
Now, I would expect the typica to be using the presanctified gifts in the dry state, for there is no obligation to distribute under both species, and the typica bread is normally intincted, then dried, in my experience, but each church Sui Iuris sets that in their liturgicon…