Court Notices published in Govt. Gazette No. 19,336 of 31 October 2014

By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 15th October, 2014, Application number 934/2014 by Silvio and Michael, brothers Scerri, whereby they prayed that it be declared open in their favour in equal shares between them, the Succession of  their brother, Adrian Scerri, Bachelor, son of Andrew Scerri and Grace née Micallef, born in Attard, resided in Birkirkara, and died in Pietà, on the 19th July, 2014, aged 42, intestate, holding identity card number 11372(M).

Wherefore any person who considers to have an interest in the matter is hereby called upon to appear before the said Court, and to bring forward his objections hereto by a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns and notices according to law.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar Civil Court and Tribunals

By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 17th October, 2014, Application number 940/2014 by Carmen Pace, George Vella  and Mary Anne Bonello, whereby they prayed that it be declared open in their favour in the quota of one third (1/3) undivided share each one of them, the Succession of  their father Antonio Vella, son of the late Pasquale and Carmela née Bonavia, born and resided in Żabbar, where he died on the 10th December, 2013, aged 82, intestate, holding identity card number 834830(M).

Wherefore any person who considers to have an interest in the matter is hereby called upon to appear before the said Court, and to bring forward his objections hereto by a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns and notices according to law.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar Civil Court and Tribunals

By means of a decree given on the 13th October, 2014, by the Civil Court (Family Section), in the records of the Sworn Application, in the names Cutajar Jason vs Abdessalem Ben Hayfa, Application number 194/14 AL, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service in terms of Article 187 (3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.

By means of a Sworn Application filed in the Civil Court (Family Section), in the names Jason Cutajar (ID 209682M) vs Hayfa Ben Abdessalem (ID 26332A), on the 3rd September, 2014, the applicant Jason Cutajar humbly asked this Honourable Court:

To dissolve and terminate the community of acquests existing between the parties, and liquidate the same in such a manner that there be established divided portions and assigned to the parties ...omissis... pronounce the dissolution of marriage beteween the parties in terms of Aricle 66B of Cap. 16 of the Laws of Malta for reasons and torts imputable exclusively to the respondent.

With costs and interest against the respondent summoned so that a reference to her evidence be made.

Respondent: Hayfa Ben Abdessalem, 16, Kensington Court, Flat 7, Triq Bordino, St Paul’s Bay.

The Sworn Application in the names Cutajar Jason vs Abdessalem Ben Hayfa, application number 194/14 AL, has been deferred for hearing to Wednesday, 12th of November, 2014, at 9.15 a.m.

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree given on the 21st October, 2014, by the First Hall Civil Court, in the records of the Sworn Application, in the names A.C.B. International Company Limited vs Denisons Properties Limited, application number 729/14 AF, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the defendant company in terms of Article 187 (3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.

By means of a Sworn Application filed in the First Hall Civil Court, in the names A.C.B. International Company Limited (C 2584) vs Denisons Properties Limited (C 32653), on the 19th August, 2014, the company A.C.B. International Company Limited (C 2584), asked this Honourable Court saving any necessary and opportune declaration:

To condemn the company Denisons Properties Limited (C 32653) so that in execution of the preliminary agreement dated 31st July, 2013, they come forward for the publication of the sale and transfer of the divided portion of land known as “Ta’ Bajdun”, with a facade on Triq tat-Torba, in the vicinity of “Tal-Mirakli”, limits of Ħal Lija and Mosta, with the pacts and conditions indicated in the same preliminary agreement, and uphold the other demands in the application.

With all costs against the respondent company summoned so that a reference to its evidence be made.

Reserving all the damages resulting from the actions of the defendant company as premised in this application.

Respondent: Denisons Properties Limited, No 13, ‘Bayline’, Flat 2, San Ġeraldu Street, St Paul’s Bay.

The Sworn Application in the names A.C.B. International Company Limited vs Denisons Properties Limited, Application number 729/14 AF, has been deferred for hearing to Thursday, 20th November, 2014, at 9.00 a.m.

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By a decree of the 22nd October, 2014, given by the First Hall Civil Court, the Court ordered that the extract hereunder mentioned be published for the purpose of service according to Article 338 (1) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

That by application and a Schedule of set-off filed contemporaneously by HSBC Bank Malta plc, on the 21st October, 2014, the approval of the said judicial act is being demanded for the amount of €364,226.74, following judicial Sale by Auction 10/06 in the names HSBC Bank Malta plc vs Antoine Vassallo, held under the Authority of the said Court on the 14th October, 2014.

According to Article 338 (2) of Cap. 12: Any person who may have an interest and the persons so served shall be allowed the time of twenty days to file an answer stating in detail the reasons for their opposition and the amounts in contestation, and where such opposition is based on a claim against the proceeds of sale and alleged cause of preference, they are to state the amount of such claim and the basis for the preference. Such persons shall with the answer file all relevant evidence to substantiate their opposition.

RUDOLPH MARMARÀ

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of  a decree given on the 9th October, 2014, by the Court of Appeal, in the records of the Appeal Application, in the names Mario Micallef vs Philip Caruana et, Application number 740/03, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent Philip Caruana in terms of Article 187 (3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.

By means of an Appeal Application filed in the Court  of Appeal, in the names Mario Micallef (ID 681458M) vs Philip Caruana, and by a decree of the 17th November, 2003, Omnibus Pool intervened in the cause et statu et terminis, Decided 19th November, 2013, on the 9th December, 2013, the plaintiff respectfully pleaded:

1. That by means of a sworn application in the names premised filed by him in the Honourable Court First Hall Civil Court, the plaintiff appellant after having premised that on the 24th October, 2001, whilst the said defendant respondent Philip Caruana was driving his charabanc, registration number EBY531 in National Road, Blata l-Bajda, carelessly, negligently and without observing the traffic regulations, collided  into a motor cycle of the type Peugeot with registration  number HAW039, property of the plaintiff appellant and driven by him caused damages and serious injuries to the same plaintiff. The plaintiff appellant was seriously injured in the same accident and suffered a permanent disability.  As established by the certificate issued by the Surgeon Anthony Bernard, attached with the writ of summons the same plaintiff appellant suffered and shall continue to suffer huge damages.

...........omissis..........

That called upon to pay the damages, the respondent defendant Philip Caruana remained in default, and the plaintiff appellant asked the Court to declare the respondent defendant Philip Caruana solely responsible for the incident or rather collision of the 24th October, 2001, in National Road, Blata l-Bajda.

2. That the defendant Philip Caruana remained in default.

3. That Omnibus Pool, the insurance of the defendant respondent asked to be admitted in this cause in statu et terminis, and by a decree of the 17th November, 2003, the Honourable First Court upheld this demand and accepted this intervention.

4. That by means of a note of observations of the intervenor in the cause Omnibus Pool, the intervening party submitted that the first demand of the plaintiff should be rejected since the car accident in question occurred due to the fault of the plaintiff himself.

5. That the facts which gave rise to this dispute are in their simplicity the following:

...........omissis...........

6. That in virtue of a judgement of the Honourable First Hall Civil Court, on the 19th November, 2013, that Court declared that it feels that in no way is it morally certain to find the demand of the plaintiff appellant justified and rejected it with costs.

7. That the plaintiff appellant is aggrieved by this judgement, and his grievances are the following:

(i) That this cause presented the Honourable First Court with a conflicting contrast of proof on the mattter  in the sphere of a car accident which is most delicate and difficult.

...........omissis...........

(ii) That in its judgement, the Honourable First Court made reference to the report made by the Legal Referee, who had concluded that the accident occurred due to the fault of the plaintiff appellant, and observed in the light of Jurisprudence  that this report constitutes in itself proof and as such should not be lightly ignored.

...........omissis...........

(iii) That as stated, the Honourable First Court found that in no way is it morally certain to find the demand of the plaintiff appellant as justified and rejected it ...omisssis... but the appellant submits that the Honourable First Court in order to reach its decision gave meaning to the concept of moral certainty that does not conform with the general doctrine of jurisprudence ...omissis... In the judgement given by the First Hall Civil Court, on the 25th April, 2002, in the cause in the names Maria Stella Borg vs Joseph Cassar, it is stated that ‘The Court, in civil matters, should decide on the proof it has before it when these instill in it that moral certainty which every Tribunal should seek, and not simply on possibilities, but that moral certainty is enough, as being based on the preponderance of  probabilities, and this differently to that which applies in the criminal camp, where the guilt should result without leaving any reasonable doubt’ ...omissis... Thus it is submitted that the onus of moral certainty which has to be applied by the Court in civil causes is not more than a careful  and accurate appreciation of the facts which resulted from the cause.

(iv) Regarding these facts, the appellant refers to his note of observations where he analysed in detail the veracity of the two versions given by the parties, and argued that the Honourable First Court had on the basis of the evidence presented to it to find the version of the appellant as more credible ...omissis... The applicant shall not in order to avoid repetition repeat the submissions already made in his note, but emphasises that the Honourable First Court after finding that it was agreed between the parties that the appellant was driving in front  of the defendant with his motor bike, agreed with the version of the respondent defendant. The appellant certainly concedes that it is physically possible  that the incident occurred because the applicant saw that he was overtaken by the bus increased the speed to reach it and then drove into it in the restricted space near the pavement. The difficulty of this version  is not physical but one of reasonable conduct ...omissis... The Honourable First Court at no moment in  its judgement  examined in detail the versions of the parties.

...........omissis...........

Thus the appellant whilst referring to all the records of this cause and all the proof brought  and reseves to bring forward al the other proof permitted to him by law, respectfully prays that this Honourable Court revokes, erases and cancels the judgement appealed given by the Honourable First Court, on the 19th November, 2013, as demanded in this application or otherwise order that the records of this cause be sent back a new to the Honourable First Court in order that the demands of the plaintiff for the liquidations of damages suffered by him be heard and decided and for the condemnation of the payment of damages so liquidated with costs against the respondent defendant Philip Caruana.

Service: ‘Bena Vista’, Flat 2, Triq il-Qawra, Saint Paul’s Bay.

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree given on the 30th September, 2014, by the Civil Court (Family Section), in the records of the Letter of Mediation, in the names Shirley Ann Zumyat (ID 258080M) vs Walid Masri Zumyat (ID 58038A), the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the defendant Walid Masri Zumyat in terms of Article 187 (3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.

By means of an application filed in the Civil Court (Family Section), in the records of the Letter of Mediation, in the names Shirley Ann Zumyat vs Walid Masri Zumyat, the applicant Shirley Ann Zumyat respectfully pleaded:

That presently, the applicant is passing through separation proceedings which are in their initial stages, and infact presented a Letter of Mediation where amongst other things she is asking to be entrusted with the care and custody of the minor ...omissis...

That as declared in the said letter of mediation, the applicant married her husband Walid Masri Zumyat on the 27th March, 2010, and from this marriage they had a girl ……omissis……who is today two years old.

That later on, the applicant and her husband  carried out the necessary  legal procedures so that the applicant’s daughter ...omissis... be adopted legally by her husband.

That on the 9th November, 2013, the applicant’s husband abandoned the matrimonial home.

That since that time, the applicant does not have any idea where her husband is living.

That despite of this her husband did not attend the mediation sitting.

...........omissis...........

That during these all these months that he has abandoned the matrimonial home, the applicant’s husband has not shown any interest in his children.

That furthermore the applicant strongly fears that her husband escapes to Libya.

Thus, in view of the above, the applicant respectfully prays so that pendente lite the Hon. Court:

1. Orders that the care and custody of her minor children ...omissis... be entrusted exclusively to the applicant.

2.  Give every other provision which this Court orders fit and opportune in the circumstances of the case.

Respondent: 9, St Patrick’s Court, Triq il-Punent, Msida.

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree of the 24th October, 2014, on an application of Michael Fenech filed on the 21st of October,  2014, in the records of application number 707/2014, this Court ordered the Publication of the Inventory of the late Salvatore Fenech (ID 320122M), son of the late Michele and Maria née Borg, born in Mosta and died at Tal-Qroqq, Imsida, on the 4th of January, 2014, aged 91 years.

This publication is going to be held on Tuesday, the 19th of October, 2014, at eleven o’clock in the morning, at the office with the name “Fenlex”, number 85, St John Street, Valletta, under the ministry of Notary Dr Hugh Grima.

MARCEL BUGEJA

For the Registrar Civil Court and Tribunals

By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of  the 19th September, 2014, the publication of the following extract was ordered for the purpose of service in terms of Article 187 (3) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

Mobisle Communications Limited (C 24655), of Fra Diego Street, Marsa, filed a Claim, on the 10th April, 2013, whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Joseph Muscat (ID 1043945M), of  26, Limbordin, limits of St Paul’s Bay,  to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €298.59, which amount is due to the plaintiff company.

With costs and legal interests.

The case (Claim Number 220/13GB) is deferred for the 7th November, 2014 at 12.30 p.m.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

 By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of  the 15th September, 2014, the publication of the following extract was ordered for the purpose of service in terms of Article 187 (3) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

Mobisle Communications Limited (C 24655), of Fra Diego Street, Marsa MRS 1501, filed a Claim, on the 4th March, 2014, whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Carlo Galea (ID 348069M), of  Flat 1,  Blokk C, Door A, Triq iċ-Ċikwejra, Santa Luċija,  to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €310.74, which amount is due to the plaintiff company.

With costs and legal interests.

The case (Claim Number 147/14YMS) is deferred for the 11th November, 2014 at 12.30 p.m.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree given by the Civil Court (Family Section), on the 12th August, 2014, in the records of the Sworn Application number 150/13 AL, in the names Roseanne Bighourdain vs Abdelhamid Bighourdain, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the defendant in terms of Article 187 (3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.

By means of an Application filed in the Civil Court (Family Section), in the records of the Sworn Application number 150/13 AL, in the names Roseanne Bighourdain vs Abdelhamid Bighourdain, on the 13th October, 2014, the applicant Roseanne Bighourdain asked for the issuing of a Warrant of summons of witness in the cause mentioned above against the person mentioned later on for the sitting and time indicated.

Person to be summoned as witness. (1) Abdelhamid Bighourdain.

Address: (1) 19, Flat 2, Triq San Ġużepp, Sliema.

Day and time when he is to appear and where: On the 13th November, 2014, at 10.00 a.m. at the Family Court Building, before Madame Justice Abigail Lofaro.

Documents which he is to produce: In order to testify regarding the facts of the cause.

Sgd. Advocate Daniel Calleja, 204/3, Triq l-Ifran, Valletta.

Legal Procurator. PL Daniel Aquilina

Filed by PL D. Aquilina without doc.

Warrant for the Summons of a Witness

Republic of Malta

To the Court Marshall

Given by the Civil Court (Family Section) with the witness of the Hon. Madam Justice Abigail Lofaro LLD, Dip. Stud. Rel. Mag. Jur (Eur Law).

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By a decree given by the Civil Court First Hall, on the 24th September, 2014, on the application of HSBC Bank Malta plc, Tuesday, 9th December, 2014, at eleven in the morning, for the Sale by Auction to be held on the first floor, Courts of Justice, Republic Street, Valletta, of the following property:

The house numbered thirty-five (35), in Triq is-Sajjieda, Marsa, valued at sixty-three thousand Euro (€63,000).

The said tenement is the property of Cachia Demis and Cachia Sandra.

N.B. The said tenement will be sold as described in the judicial sales act 33/2013.

RUDOLPH MARMARÀ

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By a decree given by the Civil Court First Hall, on the 27th October, 2014, on the application of HSBC Bank Malta plc, Tuesday, 16th December, 2014, at eleven in the morning, for the Sale by Auction to be held on the first floor, Courts of Justice, Republic Street, Valletta, of the following properties:

The property numbered thirty-nine (39), in Triq il- Qawnara, corner with Triq il-Ħut, Marsaskala, and overlying airspace, free and unencumbered, with all its rights and appurtenances, valued one million and two hundred thousand Euros (€1,200,000).

The garage numbered sixty (60), in Triq il-Ħut, Marsaskala, and overlying airspace, free and unencumbered, with all its rights and appurtenances, valued at one hundred thirty thousand Euros (€130,000).

The said tenements are the property of Mizzi Joan.

N.B. The said tenements will be sold as described in the judicial sales act 7/2014.

RUDOLPH MARMARÀ

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

Republic of Malta

To the Court Marshall 

By means of a decree given by this Court, on the 17th September, 2014, following a request of Antonia Attard et, it was ordered that deputy curators be chosen to represent the vacant inheritance of the deceased John Cuschieri, in the records of Sworn Application 46/09 GG, in the names Antonia Attard et vs Commissioner of Lands vs Deputy Curators, and in the relative and subsequent acts.

By means of an Application filed in the Land Arbitration Board, in the names Antonia Attard (ID 462350M); Josette Salomone Reynaud (ID 651454M); John Cuschieri (ID 55957M); and Mariella Darmanin Demajo (ID 401852M), in her own name and in the name and in representation of the absent Vincent Cuschieri (Canadian Passport number 838072), on the 23rd September, 2009, the applicant Antonia Attard et respectfully pleaded:

That by means of a judicial act of the 3rd September, 2009, issued by the Commissioner of Land there was offered the compensation of eight thousand nine hundred and sixty-eight Euro and nine cents (€8,968.09) for the absolute purchase as free and unencumbered of the premises number 91, Apartment 16, Triq il-Merkanti, Valletta.

That on the basis of the report drawn up by Architect Ivan Cachia hereby attached, it results that the real value in the context of the size of the premises de quo as well as the locality is of circa sixty-four thousand Euro (€64,000), much higher from than the sum offered as compensation on the part of the Commissioner of Lands.

Thus, the applicants whilst declaring that the compensation offered is not just, they are asking that the compensation established and liquidated in favour of the applicant is real and reflects the real value.

With costs against the respondent.

The application number 46/09 GG, in the names Attard Antoine vs Commissioner of Lands, has been deferred for hearing to the 19th November, 2014, at 9.00 a.m.

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 Superior Courts with the witness of the Hon. Magistrate Giovanni Grixti LLD, Doctor of Laws.

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

It is being notified that by a decree given by the Criminal Court, Judge Michael Mallia LLD, on the 4th September, 2014, following an application filed by Emanuel Bajada on the 25th August, 2014, Court Case number 992/2005,  in the names The Police (Police Inspector Paul Vassallo) versus:

Emanuel Bajada, 61 years old, son of Carmelo and Carmela née Zammit, born in Ħamrun, on the 20th December, 1953, and residing at Manor Court, Block F, Flat 4, Tourists Street, Qawra, holder of identity card number 70054 (M).

Varied the freezing order only with respect to Adam’s Guest House, Ross Street, St Julians, and the contents of safe deposit box number 37B held in bank of Valletta.

The freezing of all assets was ordered by the Court of Magistrates (Malta) in the above mentioned case on the 7th September, 2006, and was duly published in the Government Gazette on the 22nd September, 2006.

DR JOHN SEYCHELL NAVARRO

Dip. Hlth Science, Dip. Mgmt Stud, Dip. Not. Pub. LLB, LLD

Assistant Registrar Criminal Courts and Criminal Tribunals

By means of a decree given by the Court of Appeal, in the records of the Appeal Application, in the names Carmelo, sive Charles Foca et vs Francis Spiteri et, application number 600/10, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondents Carmelo, sive Charles Foca and his wife Mariella Foca in terms of Article 187 (3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.

By means of an Appeal Application filed in the Court of Appeal, following the judgement of the fourteenth (14th) of November, 2013, Sworn Application number 600/10 SM,  Carmelo, sive Charles Foca, identity card number 462371M, and his wife Mariella Foca identity card number 496675M, vs Francis Spiteri, identity card number 249066M, and his wife Rita Spiteri, identity card number 480068M, and by a decree dated 12th October, 2010, was called in the case Frank Cachia on the 4th December, 2013, the applicant Francis (ID 249066M) and Rita (ID 480068M) spouses Spiteri respectfully pleaded:

That the applicant respondents filed a sworn application dated 11th June, 2010, against the appellants whereby they premised the following:

That by means of a preliminary agreement dated 15th February, 2010, drawn up by Notary Dr Mario Bugeja, the respondents bound themselves to transfer to Frank Cachia, the premises without name or number in Triq il-Qaliet, Marsaskala, which premises occupied part of that which was formerly ‘Villa Hamilton’,  subject to the annual temporary groundrent of (€67.86), and towards the price of (€209.643.00).

That by means of another writing dated 24th February, 2010, Frank Cachia assigned his rights resulting from the preliminary agreement in favour of the present applicants.

That the preliminary agreement dated 15th February, 2010, above referred to, was extended till the end of May 2010.

That by means of a deed of constitution of a guarantee dated 15th April, 2010, in the records of Notary Dr Naomi Mugliette, the respondents in solidum gave in favour of the applicants a Special Hypothec in the sum of (€190,437.92), representing the deposit that the applicants paid the respondents for the sale of the property above indicated.

That by means of a judicial letter dated 13th May, 2010, the respondents were called upon for the publication of the definitive contract of the sale of the same premises.

That notwithstanding this call indicated in the preceeding paragraph, the respondents did not come forward for the execution of the said preliminary agreement in favour of the applicants.

That thus, the applicants called upon this Court so that the respondents shall have the opportunity to state why this Court should not:

1. Declare that the respondents are together obliged to sell the premises above referred to.

2. Order the respondents so that in solidum they come forward to the publication of the final deed within a short and peremptory period.

3. To fix a time and place for the publication of the act de quo.

4. ...........omissis...........

5. ...........omissis...........

6. Saving any action for damages due to the applicants.

7. With costs against the respondents.

The appellants spouses Spiteri pleaded the following:

1. That the claims of the applicants are unfounded.

2. That there is a valid reason at law why the respondents Spiteri did not come forward to the final deed of transfer.

3. ...........omissis...........

4. ...........omissis...........

5. ...........omisis...........

6. That thus today everything should go back to the ‘status quo ante’.

7. Saving any other lines of defence.

The person called into the cause Frank Cachia pleaded the following:

1. That he does not have the necessary juridical interest to be a party in this cause.

2. That there does not exist any element which justifies the behaviour of the respondents to default in coming forward to the publication of the final deed of transfer of the premises in question.

3. ...........omissis...........

4. Saving other pleas.

In its judgement, the Court decided so:

Thus, in view of the premised, this Court considers that the applicants proved their case according to law, and consequently whilst rejecting the replies of the respondents Francis and Rita spouses Spiteri, and of the person called into the cause Frank Cachia, upholds the demands of the applicants Carmelo, sive Charles and Mariella spouses Foca; and

1. Declares  that the respondents Spiteri are together obliged to sell the premises without name and without number, in Triq il-Qaliet, Marsaskala.

2. Order the same respondents Spiteri so that in solidum they come forward to the publication of the final deed of sale in question within four months from the date of this judgement.

3. ...........omissis...........

4. ...........omissis...........

5. That it also authorises the applicant Foca so that in the eventual defaulting of the respondents,  they deduct that sum that shall be equivalent to the provisional tax on the capital gains and every tax and other relative expenses ...omissis... whilst the remaining balance be deposited under the authority of this Court to be withdrawn by the respondents Spiteri against the release of the due receipt.

6. With costs as indicated in the original sworn application against the respondents.

That the appellant defendants felt aggrieved by this judgement, and are thus presenting this humble appeal for the consideration of this Honourable Court of Appeal.

That the grievances of the appellants are clear and manifest, and consist in the following:

The First Grievance

That the appellants point that the judgement appealed did not go into the proof nor analysed the legal arguments brought forward especially by the appellants to defend themselves before it as defendants in the cause.

That thus it merits that this Court qua Court of Revision delve into the proof as well as examine and decide the legal argumentation brought by the appellants before the Honourable First Court.

...........omissis...........

That with all respect, the judgement appealed is lacking in any serious motivations as to how the Honourable First Court reached its final decision and in some paragraphs decided this dispute in favour of the applicants and stated the following:

14. That the disagreement between the respondents and the party called into the suit should remain between them and the third person (the spouses Foca), should not bear the consequences of their actions or admissions for which they are not to blame, or in any manner contributed to their development.

15. ...........omissis...........

16. That furthermore, the applicants have already paid the large part of the price agreed, and thus it is not just that due to the disagreement between the parties and the party called into the cause they suffer in this disproportionate manner.

17. ...........omissis...........

That in these paragraphs which in substance are the ‘parte considerandi’ of the Court of First Instance completely ignored that the respondent applicants Foca took a decision when they accepted that there be transferred to them the rights which the person called into the suit the respondent Frank Cachia acquired from the appellants. Certainly the spouses Foca were aware of the fact that there were not only transferred to them the rights which F. Cachia had but even the obligations (Art. 169 et Cap. 16). The respondent F. Cachia violated the agreement towards the appellants in three ways, and consequently the respondents Foca as the persons who took over the same rights and obligations are responsible towards the appellants.

...........omissis...........

That the appellants refer to the points number seventeen (17) and eighteen (18) of the ‘ parte considerandi’ of the judgement appealed. Here, the Court of First Instance is delving into arguments which with all respect are not legal at all, and certainly do not rebutt the legal argument that the appellants brought forward before the Court of First Instance ...omissis... This does not destroy the argument  that they assumed the obligations which Frank Cachia had, and consequenly they had the obligation or that in the first place they see that Cachia abides by them, or that outrightly they carry these obligations themselves. This was proved by the appellants not to have been carried out. That thus, this grievance is to be upheld by this Honourable Court.

The Second Grievance

That this grievance brought forward by the respondent, defendants relates as to the way how the Court of First Instance pronounced itself  as to the ‘capo spese’.

It appears even from that stated by the Court of First Instance in the ‘parte considerandi’ that the person called into the cause F. Cachia is to pay all the costs.

That then if one were to make reference to the first grievance above indicated, certainly this Honourable Court should conclude that certainly the respondents should not pay the costs of this cause.

...........omissis...........

That thus, this grievance should be upheld as the appellants do not pay any costs, and in any case even if this  grievance is upheld alone, the same appellants should not bear such expense.

Thus, the applicant appellants whilst referring to the proof produced, and reserve to bring forward all that proof permitted by law even at this stage of appeal pray with respect for the reasons above premised that this Honourable Court of Appeal to uphold their Appeal, and modify and reform the judgement of the Court of First Instance given on the fourteenth (14th) of November, 2013, as demanded in this Appeal Application.

Notify Respondents: Carmelo, sive Charles and Mariella spouses Foca, ‘Soleado’, Triq Salvu Buhagiar, Marsaskala (two services).

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By a decree given by the Civil Court First Hall, on the  11th September, 2014, on the application of Vella Silvio pro et noe, Tuesday, 4th November, 2014, at half past eleven in the morning, has been fixed for the Sale by Auction to be held on the first floor of these Courts of Justice, Republic Street, Valletta, of the following property:

The maisonette number eighty-one (81), named ‘Theuma House’, formerly numbered six (6), in Triq il-Karmnu, Żabbar, on two floors, with an underlying garage belonging to third parties, with its own airspace, free and unencumbered and valued at one hundred thousand Euros (€100,000).

The said tenement is the property of Alfred Theuma (ID 522462M).

N.B. The said tenement will be sold as described in the acts of the judicial sale 64/2013.

RUDOLPH MARMARÀ

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By a decree given on the 17th September, 2014, by the Civil Court First Hall, the Court ordered that the extract hereunder mentioned be published for the purpose of service according to Article 187 (3) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

By the application filed in the Civil Court First Hall, on the 29th May, 2014, by Bank of Valletta plc (C 2833), application number 33/14 in the names Bank of Valletta plc  vs Fabian Catania et, being asked that the Court orders the Sale by Auction of:

The tenement officially numbered eighty-four (84), known as numbered sixty-three (63), in Triq Santa Marija, Gudja, including the relative airspace of the said property.  The said property is subject to enjoy servitudes resulting from its position, the rest free and unencumbered, with all its rights and appurtenances.  The said tenement is subject to annual piz piju of one maltese lira (Lm1.00), equivalent to two Euro and thirty-three euro cents (€2.33).

The said property belongs to Fabian Catania (ID 544275M) and Mariella Catania (ID 506976M).

MARVIC FARRUGIA

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By a decree given on the 17th October, 2014, by the Civil Court First Hall, the Court ordered that the extract hereunder mentioned be published for the purpose of service according to Article 187 (3) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

By the application filed in the Civil Court First Hall, on the 30th July, 2014, by Bank of Valletta plc (C 2833), application number 46/14 in the names Bank of Valletta plc vs Josef Borg, being asked that the Court orders the Sale by Auction of:

The garage unnumbered and unnamed, unofficially marked number four (4), including and forming an integral part of the garage is part underlying the ramp that gives access to the complex of garages which forms part, including its sottosoul, but underlying third party property, and the garage is part of a complex of garages in basement level, accessible from a common entrance number twenty-eight (28) and unnamed, in Triq San Pawl, in Gudja.  The garage is bounded on the East with the sottosoul of the road, on the East with the said drive in, and on the South with property of Annunziato and Giuseppe Mifsud or their successors in title.

The said property belongs to Josef Borg (ID 578391M).

MARVIC FARRUGIA

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By a decree of the 17th October, 2014, given by the First Hall Civil Court, the Court ordered that the extract hereunder mentioned be published for the purpose of service according to Article 187 (3) of the code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

That by an application filed by Bank of Valletta plc on the 9th July, 2014, the said person is asking for the withdrawal of keys from the schedule of deposit 36/14 in the names Bank of Valletta plc vs Alexander Vella and Tania Vella, in the acts of the judicial Sale by Auction numbered 65/13 in the names Bank of Valletta plc (C 2833) vs Alexander Vella and Tania Vella. The Court ordered the notification of the application to the other parties with a four (4) day period for the reply. 

MARVIC FARRUGIA

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree given by the First Hall Civil Court, on the 27th October, 2014, in the records of the Sworn Application, in the names Med Development Services Ltd vs Dave Rolph, application number 1176/13 SM, 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 First Hall Civil Court, in the names Med Development Services Limited (C 23824) carrying on trade even by the name Archimed Projects vs Dave Rolph (ID 01151A), on the 9th December, 2013, the applicant Med Development Services Limited (C 23824) asked this Honourable Court:

To declare that the respondent Dave Rolph is a debtor of the applicant in the sum of thirty-six thousand, one hundred and ten Euro and fifteen cents (€36,110.15), and condemn Dave Rolph to pay the applicant the sum of thirty-six thousand, one hundred and ten Euro and fifteen cents (€36,110.15).

With costs as demanded against the respondent summoned so that a reference to his oath be made.

Respondent: 198, Triq Sant’ Ursula, Valletta.

The Sworn Application in the names Med Development Services Ltd vs Dave Rolph, application 1176/13 SM, has been deferred for the 10th December, 2014, at 9.00 a.m.

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By a decree given by the Civil Court First Hall, on the 23rd October, 2014, on the application of Combinations Limited, Tuesday, 16th December, 2014, from nine in the morning till noon, has been fixed for the Sale by Auction to be held on the first floor of these Courts of Justice, Republic Street, Valletta, of the following properties:

The four apartments situated on the second and third floor named ‘Diana Flats’, with internal numbers three (3), four (4), five (5) and six (6), in Triq il-Merluzz, Qawra, limits of St Paul’s Bay, valued at €186,350.

The said tenements are the property of Lukanda Limited.

N.B. The said tenements will be sold as described in the acts of file number 97/02.

MARVIC FARRUGIA

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree given on the 9th October, 2014, by the Court of Appeal, in the records of the Appeal Application, in the names Anthony Albanese (ID 616041M) in his own name, also in the name of Therese Albanese (ID 212745M); Dolores Ripard (ID 685432M); Antoinette Micallef (ID 244634M), and Maria Antoinette Portelli, holder of Canadian Passport number KT219722, all siblings Albanese vs Joseph Mifsud (ID 710362M), the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent Dolores Ripard in terms of Article 187 (3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.

By means of an Appeal Application filed in the Court of Appeal, Sworn Application number 1042/12 JA, Anthony Albanese (ID 616041M) in his own name, and in the name of Therese Albanese (ID 212745M); Dolores Ripard (ID 685432M); Antoinette Micallef (ID 244634), and Maria Antoinette Portelli holder of Canadian Passport number KT 219722, all siblings Albanese vs Joseph Mifsud (ID 710362M), on the 17th October, 2012, the applicant Joseph Mifsud (ID 710362M) respectfully pleaded:

That by means of  a sworn application, the plaintiffs asked the First Hall to order that:

1. The Applicant appellant to vacate the premises within a short and peremptory period which shall be fixed by this Honourable Court.

That in reply to this demand, the applicant appellant rebutted by pleading the following:

1. That there should be proved the absence of the other plaintiffs from the Maltese Islands on the date of presentation  of the sworn application,  and in default the sworn application is null.

2. Without prejudice to that already brought forward there be pleaded the incompetence rationae materiae, and this because in the case of rural leases, the leases are regulated by Cap. 199 of the Laws of Malta.

3. That without prejudice, the land in question was leased to the applicant by Joseph Falzon who was the emphyteuta,  and thus the applicant enjoys the title of rural lease (agricultural lease) on the same land.

4. ...........omissis...........

5. ...........omissis...........

6. That the applicant declares that he knows about the facts brought forward personally.

Saving further pleas.

That by means of a judgement dated 29th January, 2014, the Honourable First Court decided by rejecting the pleas of the applicant appellant, and upheld the plaintiff’s demands.

That the applicant appellant felt aggrieved from this decision,  and wants to file a humble appeal therefrom.

Facts

That the premises in question was given by temporary emphyteusis to Michelina Mifsud in 1912, and this concession lapsed on November 2011. During this emphyteusis, the successors in title of the emphyteuta a certain Ġanni Falzon had leased it to Philip Muscat.

That went the emphyteutical term lapsed, the applicant was occupying this premises by title of agricutural lease.

That agricultural leases are regulated by special regulations which are still valid  and which were not effected  by the amendments to the laws of lease.

Grievances

That the grievances are clear and manifest, and consist in:

1. Title of lease

That the Court of Appeal, in the names Josephine Cutajar vs Carmelo Galea decided on the 19th May, 1995, held that:

‘In the first place, this Court observes that although it appears that the appellants  are pretending that the only valid lease at law is that  which is made by the owner effectively this is not the case because the lease can also be made by the emphyteuta with the legal consequences contemplated by law.

That this title of lease by the emphyteuta  find its legal strength  in Article 1530 (1) of Cap. 16.

...........omissis...........

That from the proof produced, it was amply proved that the appellant is enjoying a title of lease or agricultural lease granted by the emphyteuta.

...........omissis...........

That it is here where with all respect to the Honourable First Court  the appellant does not agree with its decision especially where it upheld.

‘Thus the Court feels that it is not right that the owner who has transferred the premises by title of emphyteusis which has specific and firm rules be faced at the end of the emphyteutical period by a third person with whom he had no juridical relationship who expects to continue to occupy the premises eternally because he acquired by title of lease the premises from a temporary emphyteuta’.

That the appellant had a valid title at law always in the parametres required by Article 1530 that such a lease is made under just conditions. That thus, the demand of the respondent appellants for the eviction should not have been based on an illegal title but if ever such lease is not just due to the conditions given.

...........omissis...........

That in this case ...omissis... the applicant has a valid legal title and not as stated by the respondent plaintiffs which he does not have. That on this point the applicant appellant in his pleas raised the plea rationae materiae, and this because of the fact that once he has a valid legal title of agricultural lease it is the Rural Leases Control Board which was competent to decide the case.

Request

Thus, the applicant appellants whilst bringing all this above exposed and submitted to the attention of the Honourable  Court whilst referring to all the proof produced and reserves to bring forward all the proof permitted to him by law respectfully prays that it cancels and revokes the judgement appealed of the 29th January, 2014, in the names premised as demanded in the application.

Service: Dolores Ripard, No. 44, Triq ix-Xatt ta’ Xbiex, Ta’ Xbiex.

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals