Go Back
Court Notices published in Govt. Gazette No. 19,307 of 9 September 2014
01/01/2014
Notice 1375
1375Bann for Curators.
Republic of Malta.
To the CourtMarshall
By means of a decree given by this Court, on the 22nd August2014, following a request ofAdvocate Dr. Luigi A.SansoneLLB noe, it was ordered that deputy curators be chosen to represent Shenzhen Jiangshan Commerce & Industin the records of the Sworn Application 734/14 MCH, in the names Dr. Luigi A. Sansone noe vs Deputy Curators and in the relative and subsequent acts.
By means of an Application filedin the First Hall Civil Court, in the names Advocate Dr. Luigi A. Sansone LLB (Hons) LLDholder of identity card number 258269 letter ‘M’ as special mandataryof Japan Tobacco Inc. a foreign company incorporatedunder the laws of Japan and with an address of 2-2-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku Tokyo, Japan vs 1) Deputy Curatorsto represent Shenzhen Jiangshan Commerce & Indust, aa foreign companywith an unknown foreign address and for which there apears on the relative commercial documents SUN MOON STAR TRADING CORPORATION, a foreign entity with an indication as address of ‘RM 1801 CHENGOOG BUILDINGNo 72 LUXUN Rd,, Zhongshan DIST DALIAN, in China, 2. Deputy Curators to represent AL Shama AL Modea for Import & Export, a foreign company with an indication of address of ‘ALMANAR Street’ B -18-F302, Misurata, Libya, on the 21st August 2014, the applicant Advocate Dr. Luigi A. Sansone LLB (Hons) LLD, holder of identity card number 258269 letter ‘M’ as special mandatary of Japan Tobacco Inc, a foreign company incorporated under the laws of Japan, with an address2-2-1 Toranomon, Minatoku, Tokyo, Japan, asked this Honourable Court;
1..... To declare that the objects consisting in a quantity of cigarette products inside carton packets and relative master cases which objects all have on them the trademarks ‘Winston’ besides ‘JT’ in the case of packets and cartons whilstregarding ‘Winston Silver’ the packets, cartons and master cases bear particular representatiopns of an eagle and ’JT’andare presently held under the the authorityof theComptroller of Customs after he had found that the container marked ‘CRXU 9451739,which contained themcontravene the rights of intellectual property of the plaintiff company since the objects are falsified;
2. Orders the Comptroller of Customs to dispose of the said objects outside thechanels of Commerce in such a manner as to preclude damage to the plaintiff company or order the Comptroller of Customs to destroy thoseobjects without compensation to the defendant.
3. To take or order the Comptrollerof Customs to take as regards those objects any measure that shall have the effect todeprive the defendant from the economic benefits of the transaction.
4.Order that the defendants is to bear all the expenses in connection with the measures ordered in terms of the second and third demands of the plaintiff including the costs from the storage place till the eventual destruction.
With costs,against the defendants summoned so that a reference to their evidence be made.
Witnesses.
List of Documents.
Applicant:Advocate Dr. Luigi A. Sansone LLB (HONS) LLD holder of identity card number 258269 letter ‘M’ as special mandatary of Japan Tobacco Inc a foreign company incorporated under the laws of Japan and with an address of 2-2-1 Toranomon, Minato-Ku, Tokyo, Japan.
84, Triq Melita, Valletta.
Defendants: 1) Deputy Curators to represent Shenzhen Jiangshan Commerce & Indust aforeign company with an unknown foreign address and for whom there appears on the relative commercial documents SUN MOON STAR TRADING CORPORATION,a foreign company with an indication of an address of ‘RM 1801 ChenGongBuilding, NO 72, Luxun Rd, ZHONGSHAN Dist Dalian, in China.
Court of Justice, Valletta (two copies).
2) Deputy Curators to represent ALShama AL Modea For Import & Export , a foreign enity with an indication of address of ‘ALMANAR Street’ B 18, F302, Misurata, Libya, in Libya.
Courts of Justice, Valletta (two copies).
You are therefore ordered to affix an official copy of this bann at the entrance of this Superior Court and to summon whosoever wishes to act as curator to appear before this Registry within six days and by means of a minute to submit a declaration that he wishes so to act.
You are also ordered to inform each one that if he fails to make this declaration within the stipulated time, the Court will proceed to the selection of Curators of Office.
And after so acting or if you should encounter any difficulty in the execution of this bann, you are to inform forthwith this Court.
Given by the Civil Court First Hall,above mentioned,with the witness of the Hon. Mr Justice Giannino Caruana DemajoLLD, Doctor of Laws.
Adv. Frank Portelli,LLD
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals.
Court Warrant
1376By means of a decree given, on the 26th August 2014, by the Rent Regulation Board, in the records of the Warrant of Eviction in the names Nicholas Formosa vs Anthony Coppola, application number 1103/14, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent, in terms of Article 187(3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.
By means of a Sworn Application filed in the Rent Regulation Board, in the names Nicholas Formosa ID 438850(M) in the name and in representation of the company ColinRose Limited (C 8717) vs (Respondent) Anthony Coppola ID 192684M, on the 23rd July 2014, the applicant Nicholas Formosa noe, asked this Honourable Court:
to order the issuing of a Warrant of Eviction against the respondent (from the undermentioned premises) in execution of the under mentioned judgement and whereas the respondent failed to do this till this day.
Premises: Garage Number 8, forming part of a block known as ‘Limestone Court’ in Triq il-Wied, Mosta.
Judgement: Given by the Rent Regulation Board, on the 16th June 2014, in the names premised.
Filed by PL JP Busuttil.
Notify: Anthony Coppola, Garage No. 8, Limestone Court, Triq il-Wied, Mosta.
Warrant of Eviction.
Republic of Malta
To the Court Marshall
Given by the Rent Regulation Board by Magistrate Dr. Giovanni Grixti LLD, today 23rd July 2014.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1377
1377Bann for Curators.
Republic of Malta.
To the CourtMarshall
By means of a decree given by this Court, on the 22nd August2014, following a request ofAdvocate Dr. Luigi A.SansoneLLB noe, it was ordered that deputy curators be chosen to represent AL Shama AL Modea For Import & Export in the records of the Sworn Application 734/14 MCH,in the names Dr. Luigi A. Sansone noe vs Deputy Curators and in the relative and subsequent acts.
By means of an Application, filed , in the First Hall Civil Court, in the names Advocate Dr. Luigi A. Sansone LLB (Hons) LLDholder of identity card number 258269 letter ‘M’ as special mandataryof Japan Tobacco Inc. a foreign company incorporatedunder the laws of Japan and with an address of 2-2-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku Tokyo, Japan vs 1) Deputy Curatorsto represent Shenzhen Jiangshan Commerce & Indust, aa foreign companywith an unknown foreign address and for which there appears on the relative commercial documents SUN MOON STAR TRADING CORPORATION, a foreign entity with an indication as address of ‘RM 1801 CHENGOOG BUILDINGNo 72 LUXUN Rd,, Zhongshan DIST DALIAN, in China, 2. Deputy Curators to represent AL Shama AL Modea for Import & Export, a foreign company with an indication of address of ‘ALMANAR Street’ B -18-F302, Misurata, Libya, on the 21st August 2014, the applicant Advocate Dr. Luigi A. Sansone LLB (Hons) LLD, holder of identity card number 258269 letter ‘M’ as special mandatary of Japan Tobacco Inc, a foreign company incorporated under the laws of Japan, with an address2-2-1 Toranomon, Minatoku, Tokyo, Japan, asked this Honourable Court;
1..... To declare that the objects consisting in a quantity of cigarette products inside carton packets and relative master cases which objects all have on them the trademarks ‘Winston’ (besides ‘JT’ in the case of packets and cartons whilstregarding ‘Winston Silver’ the packets, cartons and master cases bear particular representatiopns of an eagle and ’JT’andare presently held under the the authorityof theComptroller of Customs after he had found that the container marked ‘CRXU 9451739,which contained themcontravene the rights of intellectual property of the plaintiff company since the objects are falsified;
2. Orders the Comptroller of Customs to dispose of the said objects outside thechanels of Commerce in such a manner as to preclude damage to the plaintiff company or order the Comptroller of Customs to destroy thoseobjects without compensation to the defendant.
3. To take or order the Comptrollerof Customs to take as regards those objects any measure that shall have the effect todeprive the defendant from the economic benefits of the transaction.
4.Order that the defendants is to bear all the expenses in connection with the measures ordered in terms of the second and third demands of the plaintiff including the costs from the storage place till the eventual destruction.
With costs,against the defendants summoned so that a reference to their evidence be made.
Witnesses.
List of Documents.
Applicant:Advocate Dr. Luigi A. Sansone LLB (HONS) LLD holder of identity card number 258269 letter ‘M’ asspecial mandatary of Japan Tobacco Inc a foreign company incorporated under the laws of Japan and with an address of 2-2-1 Toranomon, Minato-Ku, Tokyo, Japan.
84, Triq Melita, Valletta.
Defendants :1) Deputy Curators to represent Shenzhen Jiangshan Commerce & Indust aforeign company with an unknown foreign address and for whom there appears on the relative commercial documents SUN MOON STAR TRADING CORPORATION,a foreign company with an indication of an address of ‘RM 1801 ChenGongBuilding, NO 72, Luxun Rd, ZHONGSHAN Dist Dalian, in China.
Court of Justice, Valletta (two copies).
2) Deputy Curators to represent ALShama AL Modea For Import &Export , a foreign enity with an indication of address of ‘Almanar Street’ B 18, F302, Misurata, Libya, in Libya.
Courts of Justice, Valletta (two copies).
You are therefore ordered to affix an official copy of this bann at the entrance of this Superior Court and to summon whosoever wishes to act as curator to appear before this Registry within six days and by means of a minute to submit a declaration that he wishes so to act.
You are also ordered to inform each one that if he fails to make this declaration within the stipulated time, the Court will proceed to the selection of Curators of Office.
And after so acting or if you should encounter any difficulty in the execution of this bann, you are to inform forthwith this Court.
Given by the Civil Court First Hall,above mentioned,with the witness of the Hon. Mr.Justice Giannino Caruana DemajoLLD, Doctor of Laws.
Adv. Frank Portelli,LLD
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals.
Notice 1378
1378IT IS BEING NOTIFIED that by a decree dated 26th June 2014, given by the Court of Magistrates (Malta) as a Court of Criminal Inquiry – (Magistrate Dr Claire L. Stafrace Zammit LL.D) after an application dated 28th April, 2014 by Tarcisju Mifsud Compilation Number 191/2013 in the names:
The Police
(Inspector Jonathan Ferris)
versus:
TARĊISJU MIFSUD, 68 years, pensioner, son of Philip and Salvina née Zammit, born in Żebbuġ, on the 30th November, 1944 residing at 28, ‘Molineux’, Triq Guliermo Lorenzi, Żebbuġ and holder Identity card bearing number 1065644(M).
ACCEDED to the request of Tarcisju Mifsud so that the amount of monies frozen is limited to forty six thousand, five hundred and eighty seven euro (€46,587).
The publication of this order is being published in terms of Article 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, Chapter 373 of the Laws of Malta and Article 23A of the Criminal Code, Chapter 9 of the Laws of Malta, following another publication made on the 1st March 2013 after a decree dated 26th of February 2013 of the Court of Magistrates (Malta) as a Court of Criminal Inquiry, where the Court ordered the attachment in the hands of third parties in a general manner, all monies and other moveable and immoveable property which may be due to or belonging to Tarċisju Mifsud.
Dr John Seychell Navarro
Dip. Hlth Science, Dip Mgmt Stud., Dip. Not. Pub., LLB, LLD
Assistant Registrar
Criminal Courts and Criminal Tribunals(Malta)
Notice 1379
1379By means of a decree given, on the 21st August 2014, by the Court of Appeal, in the records of the Appeal Application, in the names Alfred Axisa vs Roger Attard, Application number 351/04, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent Roger Attard, in terms of article 187(3) et seq. of Cap 12.
By means of an Appeal Application, filed, in the Court of Appeal, Application Number 351/04, in the names Alfred Axisa (ID 244342M) and by decree dated 5th September 2013, the proceedings were transferred on to the person of Emanuela Axisa vs Roger Attard and by decree of the 10th October 2007, the company Citadel Insurance p.l.c. was made party to the suit, the applicant Citadel Insurance p.l.c. respectfully pleaded;
1......That by means of a Writ of Summons in the names premised dated 17th May 2004, the plaintiff had premised the following;
‘That whilst the plaintiff was driving the taxi number JTY -108 at about two in the morning (2.00am) of the 5th May 2003, in Triq George Borg Olivier, St. Julian’s, he was involved in a car accident with a vehicle with the number ABK-031 driven by the defendant Attard;
That as a consequence of the same incident the plaintiff suffered’ damnum emergens’ consisting in huge damage to his vehicle, medical expenses,and medicines, besides other loss of income from his work.
That the plaintiff suffered also ‘lucrum cessans’ due to the injuries he suffered and still suffers from a permanent disability.
That for the incident de quo the defendant is solely to blame due to imprudence, lack of attention, negligence and inobservance of the regulations. that thus the plaintiff asked the Honourable First Court;
1... To declare that the defendant was solely responsible for the incident in question and for the damages caused to the plaintiff.
2. Liquidate all the damages of the plaintiff if necessary by the appointment of referees.
3. Condemn the defendant to pay the plaintiff so liquidated.
2. That by means of a Note of pleas of the company called into the suit, appellant, dated 29th October 2007, the appellant company pleaded;
1. That the plaintffs claims are unfounded and are to be rejected with costs.
2.....................omissis.........
3..................omissis.................
4. Saving further pleas, which infact were not made.
3. That by means of a judgement of the 24th December 2013, the Honourable First Court, declared the following;
39.1 To declare that the defendant Roger Attard was solely responsible for the incident in question above mentioned, and the damages caused by him to the plaintiff Alfred Axisa.
39.2 Liquidate the global damages suffered by the plaintiff in the amount of (€37,232.24).
39.3 Condemn the defendant Roger Attard to pay Emanuel Attard successor in title in substitution of Alfred Axisa, the amount so liquidated in the preceeding paragraph.
39.4 With costs, as deducted in the writ of summons against the defendant Roger Attard.
4. That the appellant company felt aggrieved with the judgement of the Honourable First Court and is humbly filing this appeal.
5. That the grievances are clear and manifest and consist in the following;
(a) That the Honourable Court of First Instance, would have reached a different conclusion had it adopted its premises in so far as regards the permanent disability which the plaintiff was alleging.
(b) That the Honourable First Court, made a wrong evaluation of the facts before it, consisting in an erroneous calculation of the damages suffered by the respondent.
(c) That the Honourable First Court would have reached a different conclusion had it adopted its premises in so far as regards the respective responsibility of the two drivers involved in the incident merit of the cause.
The First Grievance.
6.That in paragraphs 21 to 24 from the judgwement appealed the Honourable First Court, analised at lenght the considerations and conclusions of the First medical expert and of the additional referees, appointed by it and rightly decided in its discretion to adopt the conclusion of the First medical expert appointed by it. That this conclusion which the Honourable First Court adopted as it had the discretion to make to the detriment of the conclusion reached by the additional experts, had to bring about that the Honurable Court of First Instance, does not award lucrum cessans as in fact it erroneously, did since one of the fundamental elements of the part of the damages known as lucrum cessans, was missing.
The Second Grievance.
7. That in the first place one should state that infact the calculation of damnum emergens presumibly included a calculation of all the loss that the respondent suffered ,till the plaintiff, today decased , was absent from work due to the injuries, he suffered in the incident merit of the cause.
.........omissis...........
8. That subordinately and without prejudice to the relevant submissions to the first grievance above it is to be stated that the Honourable Court of First Instance, erroneously assumed that from the date of the incident merit of the cause till the plaintiff died the same plaintiff did not work at all.
.........omissis...........
9. The Honourable First Court textually states 38.2.1 That on the basis of the wages recieved of (€ 6,100) annually, fixes the global amount of (€ 30,500) and namely the annual wages mentioned multiplied by five years or the dailty wage multiplied bby 1825 days. That in fact without prejudice to all the above submissions, with the greatest respect if ever, the Honourable First Court, had to multiply the daily wage (€ 16.71) by 169 days and namely the period that the plaintiff was absent from work as a cause of the incident merit of the cause.
The Third Grievance.
10. That subordinately and without prejudice to the submissions relative to the first and the second grievance after the Honourable First Court in paragraph 27 of the jusgement appealed considered ‘That however it is to be stated that it resulted that the same Axisa was not wearing the safety belt when the incident in question occurred and consequently in the following paragraph of the same judgement appealed premised ‘That thus it should also be accepted that the same Axisa contributed in this manner to the damages suffered..omissis... that in the humble opinion of the appellant company this had to bring the Honourable First Court, to apportion the resulting damages from the fact that due to the incident merit of the cause the plaintiff had lost income which he would have earned had the said incident did not occurr. That this consideration applies both to the damnum emergens as well as lucrum cessans which there would have been and which with the greatest respect the Honourable First Court erroneously adopted.
Thus for all the reasons premised the respondent company, whilst referring to its note of submissions to the proof brought before the Honourable First Court, prays that this Honourable Court, reforms, the judgment appealed and liquidate the damages as demanded in the application or send back the records before the Honourable First Court, so that the Honourable First Court, liquidate the damages as herein stated, in any case with costs, against the respondent.
Notify: 1. Roger Attard, 4, Triq Efesu, St.Paul’s Bay.
2....................omissis.................................
Adv. Frank Portelli,LL.D.
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals