Mur Lura
Court Notices published in Govt. Gazette No. 19,245 of 2nd May 2014
01/01/2014
Notice 673
673By means of a decree given by the Civil Court (Family Section), on the 4th March, 2014 in the records of the Sworn Application, in the names Christopher Falzon vs Rita Alhamo et, application number 243/13 RGM, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondents Rita Alhamo and Marija Falzon in terms of Article 187 (3) et. of Cap. 12.
By means of a Sworn Application filed in the Civil Court (Family Section), on the 18th November, 2013 in the names Christopher Falzon vs Rita Alhamo, Marija Falzon and the Director Public Registry, the applicant Christopher Falzon (ID 33565M) asked this Honourable Court:
To decide and declare that he is not the natural father of Marija Falzon, and uphold the other demands in the application, saving any other declaration and provision it deems fit and opportune.
With costs against the defendant Rita Alhamo and all the defendants are summoned so that a reference to their oath be made.
Notify: Rita Alhamo, Sta Marija, Triq il-Poeżija, Ħaż-Żebbuġ.
Marija Falzon, Dar ta’ Andelika, Triq ta’ Aljzar, Safi.
The Sworn Application in the names Christopher Falzon vs Alhamo Rita et, application number 243/13 RGM, has been deferred for hearing to Thursday, 12th June, 2014 at 9.00 a.m.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 674
674By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 14th March, 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).
Mirage Holdings Ltd (C 6808),ofFlamingo Showroom, Cannon Road, Qormi, filed a Claim on the 19th June, 2013 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Maurice Galea ofFlat 2, Acropolis Flats, Triq il-Mosta, St Paul’s Bay, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €335, which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs andinterests.
The case (Claim Number 371/13DMA) is deferred for the 9th May, 2014 at 12.30 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 675
675By means of a decree given on the 27th March, 2014 by the Court of Appeal, in the records of the Appeal Application, in the names Doreen Baldacchino vs Trevor Degiorgio et, Application number 57/10 FDP, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondents Trevor Degiorgio et 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 Doreen Baldacchino (ID 392580M), in his own name and as curator ad litem of her minor son Kelvin Baldacchino vs Trevor and Maria Dolores, spouses Degiorgio (ID 66878M) and (ID 440870M), Decided 3rd May, 2013 the applicant appellants Doreen Baldacchino (ID 392580M) in her own name and as curator ad litem of her minor son Kelvin Baldacchino respectfully pleaded:
(1) That by means of the original Application presented by her on the 25th February, 2010 the applicant appellantwho is the widow of the deceased Neville Baldacchino asked the Court of First Instanceto order the respondents the sum of Euro 5,042.27 representing gypsum works, tile laying and ancillary works which her deceased husband Neville Baldacchinohad executed before he diedfor the benefitof the respondent, as well as for money lent by him brevi manu to the same respondents before he died.
(2) That the applicant appellantdemanded all the costs.
(3) That in their reply, the respondents pleaded that they did not owe any money to the deceased Neville Baldacchino.
(4) That in virtue of a judgement given by the Court of First Instance on the 3rd May, 2013 the demands of the applicant appellant were rejected with all costs against her.
(5) That the appellant felt aggrievedby this judgement, and in thus filing this appeal.
(6) That the grievances of the appellant is clear and manifestas shall be here explained.
(7) That the fundamental considerationin this cause is that naturallythe best possible proof could never be produced, this was the evidence of Neville Baldacchino himself as he had carried out the works in question, and had granted on loan money to the respondents, as he had died in tragic circumstances. However, in the Civil matters it is a well known principlethat it is not neessary to bring forwardthe best proof, and it is not necessary that the caseis proved beyond any reasonable doubt but on a balance of probabilties.
(8) That in such circumstances, it is of vital importance that the Court that is going to decide the cause requires to do a study and truly interpretative assessment of the proof brought before it.
...........omissis...........
(9) That it is good however that one makes a summary of the proof brought in this cause.
...........omissis...........
(10) That the applicant Doreen Baldacchino testified that round about the end of November 2008 (sometime before the death of Neville), she assistedfor a telephone conversation between her husband and the respondent Trevor Degiorgio, and her husband told her that the respondent owed him money,and he had promised him, that he was going to give them to him round about January, when he had to take a loan for this purpose.
...........omissis...........
(11) That Paul Baldacchino, father of the deceased Neville Baldacchino, testified that he was very close to his soneven because they worked together.He confirmed that Neville had told him that the respondent Trevor Degiorgio owed him €4,543 balance for works he had carried out for him, and he also stated that he had asked him to grant him a loan of €500 in order that he could carry on the work, and then he shall pay back everything when he takes a bank loan in January 2009.
(12) That what is very significant is the evidence of Fathi Zaineddin a worker of Arab Nationality which till the death of Neville Baldacchino took some work from him. The latteris not a member of the family, and certainly has not interest to favour one side or the other.
...........omissis...........
(13)That with all respect, the Court of First Instancemade totally wrong conclusions to reach its decision in virtue of which it rejected the applicant’s demands. The Court of First Instance made the following considerations:
(i) that there is a discrepancy in the evidence of the applicant;
(ii) that the applicants did not present any documents regarding the two payments that the applicants had already made to Neville Baldacchino;
(iii) that in the diary ofNeville Baldacchino there was nothing in the agreement reached and the payments that the respondents had made to him.
(14) That with all respect, these considerations are mistaken for the reasons that shall be here explained.In the first place nor Neville Baldacchino nor the applicant had an idea that the respondents had taken a loan from the Bank.
...........omissis...........
It is from these circumstancesthat the Court of First Instance had to reach the truth in this case and not the considerationsbecause the applicantdid not bring forward the proof of payment already made. The applicants did not need to bring forward any proof of paymentwhich had already been made because they were suing for a balance which was still due and nothing more.
(15) That one has to see what the respondents offered as proof to rebutt the proof brought forward by the applicants.
...........omissis...........
(16) That thusit is being repeated that from the evidence of the respondent Trevor Degiorgio, all the truth emerges. The respondents thought that because Neville Baldacchinois dead, the case against them cannot be proved, it was enough for them to take and state that they do not owe anything.
...........omissis...........
(17) That for these motives, the applicant appellant feels that on a balance of probabilties as required in civil matters, she managed to amply prove her case, and thus justice is to be made with her, with her deceased husband, and her minor son as heir of his father, andthe respondents be condemned to pay what is effectively due by them, with all costs and legal interest as required.
For these reasons, the applicant appellant prays that this Honourable Court revokes the judgement given by the Court of Magistrates (Malta) on the 3rd May, 2013 in the present case in the names, Doreen Baldacchino (ID 392580M) in her own name and as curator ad litem of her minor son Kelvin Baldacchino vs Trevor and Maria Dolores, spousesDegiorgio (ID 66878M and 440870M) (App. Number 57/10 FDP), and whilst rejecting the pleas raised by the respondents, uphold the applicant’s demands as deducted in the original application, with costs of both instances and legal interest as demanded against the respondents.
Notify: Trevor and Maria Dolores Degiorgio (ID 66878M and 440870M).
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Bann for Curators
676Republic of Malta
To the Court Marshall
By means of a decree given by this Court, on the 10th November, 2013 following a request of Bajja Developments Limited et,it was ordered that Deputy Curators be chosen to represent Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc,in the records of the Sworn Applicationnumber 955/10 GC, in the names Bajja Developments Limited et vs Deputy Curators, and in the relative and subsequent acts.
By means of the Sworn Application filed in the First Hall Civil Court in the names Bajja Developments Limited (C 13819) and Bajja Developments Limited (C 13745) vs Meridien S.A.S. and Deputy Curators to represent the foreign companies Starwood Hotels & Resorts WorldwideInc and Starwood Eame Services Company BVBA, on the 22nd September, 2010 the applicant Bajja Developments Limited (C 13819) and Bajja Investments Limited (C 13745) asked this Honourable Courtin view of that premised in the application:
To declare the respondent companies in solidum, or either of whom responsible for the damages suffered by the applicant companies, and uphold the other demands in the application.
With costs and interest to run according to law against the respondent companies,whose representatives are summoned so that a reference to their evidence be made.
Applicant: 39, Main Street, St Julians.
Respondents: Meridien S.A.S. Tour Maine Montparnasse, 14e, Etage 33 Avenue du Maine, 75015, Paris, France.
Starwood Eame Services Company BVBA - Rue de Brederode 2-6 - Brussels Be B-100, Belgium.
Deputy Curators in representation of the foreign company Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc, with an address 2231, East Camelback Road, 400, Phoenix AZ 85016 - United States of America.
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 Lino Farrugia Sacco LLD, Doctor of Laws.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 677
677By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 29th January, 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).
Edward Paris, ofPetite Fleur, Trejqa tal-Fleur De Lys, Santa Venera, filed a Claim on the 21st October, 2013 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Hesham Halal, ofRedeemer, Block B, Flat 2, Ħal Għaxaq, to pay the plaintiff the sum of €487, which amount is due to the plaintiff.
With costs andlegal interests.
The case (Claim Number 691/13YMS) is deferred for the 8th May, 2014 at 12.30 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 678
678By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 19th November, 2013 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), ofTriq Fra Diego, Marsa, MRS 1501 filed a Claim on the 19th July, 2013 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Grixti Terence (ID 527184M), of 22, Flat 2, Triq San Ġużepp, Valletta, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of€1,253.28 which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs andinterests.
The case (Claim Number 430/13KPS) is deferred for the 5th May, 2014 at 12.30 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 679
679By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 19th November, 2013 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), ofTriq Fra Diego, Marsa MRS 1501, filed a Claim on the 23rd July, 2013 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Miller Petri (ID 71266A), ofPender Place, Flat 1101, Triq Sant’Andrija, San Ġiljan, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €1,846.16 which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs andinterests.
The case (Claim Number 442/13KPS) is deferred for the 5th May, 2014 at 12.30 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 680
680By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 29th January, 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).
Go plc (C 22334), ofTriq Fra Diego, Marsa MRS 1501,filed a Claim on the 27th January, 2014 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Jonathan Farrugia (ID 373281M),of Dolphine House, Triq Efesu, San Pawl il-Baħar, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €677.24, which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs andlegal interests.
The case (Claim Number 53/14VG2) is deferred for the 7th May, 2014 at 1.00 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 681
681By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 29th January, 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), ofTriq Fra Diego, Marsa MRS 1501, filed a Claim on the 27th January, 2014 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Aleksander Grumic (ID 83695A), of Bayside Lodge, Flat 4, Triq Ross, San Ġiljan,to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €2,126.48 which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs andlegal interests.
The case (Claim Number 47/14VG2) is deferred for the 7th May, 2014 at 1.00 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 682
682By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 14th January, 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).
Fava Trading Limited (C 21368), of 6, Maestro Giuseppe Camilleri Street, Tal-Ħandaq, Qormi, filed a Claim on the 3rd October, 2013 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Central Catering Co Ltdand Mark Nurton(ID 311867M), of 113, Ellsephra, Triq ir-Russett, Kappara, San Ġwann, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of€415.15, which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs.
The case (Claim Number 653/13KPS) is deferred for the 5th May, 2014 at 12.30 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 683
683By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 24th March, 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).
FGL Entertainment Limited (C 41655), ofForestals, Mrieħel By Pass, Mrieħel, filed a Claim on the 23rd July, 2013 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Ryan Mizzi (ID 296992M), of Windsor Court, Flat 5, Triq Sant’Anna, Marsaskala, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of€705.70, which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs.
The case (Claim Number 445/13NHV) is deferred for the 5th May, 2014 at 12.05 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 684
684By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 15th April, 2014 Application number 343/2014 by Maria Monica Vella, Giovanna Mizzi, and Rita Ann Micallef, whereby they prayed that it be declared open in their favour in equal shares between them the Succession of their mother Giuseppa Micallef, wife of Giuseppe, daughter of the late Fortunato Pullicino and Vincenza née Sciberras, born in Qrendi, resided in Birkirkara, and died in Tal-Qroqq, limits of Imsida, on the 11th January, 2013 aged 86, intestate, holding identity card number 539827(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
Notice 685
685By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 15th April, 2014 Application number 344/2014 by Maria Monica Vella, Giovanna Mizzi, and Rita Ann Micallef, whereby they prayed that it be declared open in their favour in equal shares between them the Succession of their father Giuseppe Micallef, widower of Giuseppa, son of the late Salvatore and Carmela née Grech, born in Żebbuġ, Malta, resided in Birkirkara, and died in Tal-Qroqq, limits of Imsida, on the 29th November, 2013 aged 81, intestate, holding identity card number 2945327(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
Notice 686
686By means of a decree of the 16th April, 2014 on an application ofMarianna, sive Manon Calleja, and her children Ryan Calleja and Troy Calleja filed on the 14th April, 2014 in the acts of decree number 1041/2013, this Court ordered the Publication of the Inventory of the assets of the late Roger Calleja, husband of the same Marianna Calleja, son of the late Laurence and Louise née Farrugia, born and resided in Sliema, and died in Floriana, on the 7th October, 2013 aged 67, holding identity card number 1026445(M).
This publication is going to be held on Tuesday, 20th May, 2014 at half past two in the afternoon (2.30 p.m.) at the office named 152/1, Triq in-Naxxar, San Ġwann, by a deed of Notary Doctor Marco Buttigieg.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Court and Tribunals
Notice 687
687By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 29th November, 2013 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 1st October, 2013 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Jane Hanna Lundin (ID 55149A), ofStringi, Flat 4, Triq il-Kbira, l-Imġarr, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of€824.69, which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs and legal interests.
The case (Claim Number 640/13GB) is deferred for the 9th May, 2014 at 12.30 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 688
688By means of a decree given on the 24th March, 2014 in the records of the Sworn Application in the names Seychell Rachel vs Portelli Terrence, application number 61/14 RGM, the following publication was ordered for the 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 Civil Court (Family Section), in the names Rachel Seychell (ID 544374M) vs Terrence Portelli (ID 402272M), on the 21st February, 2014 the applicant Rachel Seychell asked this Honourable Court:
To declare the dissolution of the marriage contracted between the parties on the 16th March, 2002 and uphold the other demands in the application.
The respondent is summoned so that a reference to his evidence be made.
Applicant: 150, St. Mary Street, Tarxien.
Service: 76, Jasmine, S. Sommier Street, Ta’ Paris, Birkirkara.
The Sworn Application in the names Seychell Rachel vs Portelli Terence, application number 61/14 RGM, has been deferred for hearing to Wednesday, 7th May, 2014 at 9.00 a.m.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 689
689By means of a decree given by the Court of Appeal(Inferior Jurisdiction), on the 1st April, 2014 inthe records of the Appeal Application number 144/12 MCH, in the names Michael Tabone et vs The Malta Planning and Environment Authority et, the following publicationwas ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent Tony Gauci in terms ofArticle 187 (3) et seq. of Cap. 12.
By means of an Application filed in the Court of Appeal(Inferior Jurisdiction)PA 2610/2007, Appeal No. 274/09 CF,Michael Tabone et vs vs The Malta Planning and Environment Authority and the party called into the suit Tony Gauci, on the 10th October, 2012 the applicant Saviour (ID 620545M) and Maria Grazia (ID 188238M) better known as Grace spouses Muscat, the Honourable Dr Joseph Muscat (ID 110274M) and his wife Michelle Muscat (ID 260174M), Michael and Lorraine, spouses Tabone, Mark and Irene,spouses Bonavia, Michelle and Jason, spouses Mangion, John Mary Garnisi, Pauline Garnisi, Daniela Garnisi, Vincent and Carmen Bonnici, Carlos and Melanie, spouses Zerafa, Carmelo and Carmen, spouses Gatt, Paul Gatt and Daniela Zerafa, Joe and Katrina Bonnett respectfully pleaded:
That by means of a decision of the 29th March, 2012 The Environment and Planning Review Tribunal in the case in the names premised decided that:
The Tribunal thus and in view of the considerations above made is upholding this appeal limitedly, and ordersthat the applicantafter the the consultation process with the respective officials of the Authority is carried out, submits new plans which reflect this decision. The Authorityhas up to issue the permit demanded by the applicant up to thirty days after, and the development be approved with the conditions normally imposed in similar applications in this case ...omissis... After the Authority is satisfiedof these plans,it has to send them for final approval by the Tribunal.
That the appellants in view of the decision above referred continued to wait in order to theybe parties in the said ‘final approval of the Tribunal, and thus considered such decision as a partial one and thus did not feelthat they should bring forward, or that they could bring forward an appeal at this stage.
That subsequently during the month of September, 2012 the appellants were informedthat not only the new plans had been submitted, but that the permission by the Authoritywas issued on their basis without the appellants being involved, and much less notified during this last crucial stage.
That thus after the issuing of such permits, the appellants noticed that the decision of the 29th March, 2012 was infact considered by the Tribunal as a final one.
..............omissis..........
That the appellants thus feel aggrieved by this decision, and thus in virtue of the present are humbly filing this humble appeal from the same decision.
That the facts in brief regarding this appeal are the following:
(i) That in December, 2009 the appellants raised their objection to the application bearing number PA/02610/07for the following reasons.
The approved development runs counter to the recomendations of the Executive Board, which Board was consulted by the DCC for guidance. The Executive Board’s negative recomendations were then ignored at decision stage.
...........omissis...........
The proposed excavations do not respect the minimum distance of 76cm from the common party wall, and as such the proposed number of basement garages/parking spaces cannot be accommodated.This implies a higher storage of on site parking provision.
That the decision of the Environment and Planning Revision Tribunal was given on the 29th March, 2012 that as shall be pointed out later on it was a decision which certainly cannot be considered as a final one, and this because during the judgement stage on the 29th March, 2012 the appellants did not yet know the conditions which the Authority was to impose in its permit and on the basis of which plansit was to issue the permit.
Regarding this, the appellants communicated with the same Tribunal by means of letters which were acknowledged on the part of MEPA,whereby the appellants showedtheir wish to be informed with the new developmentswhich were to take place after the judgement of the Tribunal.
The appellantsin virtue of such judgementstill remained in the impossibility to appealbecause at that stagethey did not know the outcome of the proposed development.
The First Grievance
That the first grievance of the appellants is clear and manifest, and consists in the fact that the Tribunal applied the Law badly when in its decision it failed to give a final decision.
...........omissis...........
The Tribunal thus did not conclude its decisionwhen it left it to the Authority so that it sees that the problems raised by the Tribunal be addressed in the new plans that the respondents had to produce before it could issue its permits.
This factor and namely the lack of a final decision on the part of the Tribunal was the reason why the appellants brought forward this appeal and this stage, and not within the term of twenty days as prescribed by Art. 41(6) of Cap 504 of the Laws of Malta because they were awaiting a final decision by the Tribunal as del resto the same decision is upholding.
The Second Grievance
Linked to the first grievance, the second grievance isthat the Tribunaldid not respect the sacrosant principle of audi alteram partem till the end, because subsequently to the decision of the Tribunal, the appellants were completelyignored.At no time were they consultedwhen new plans were submitted by the applicants, and infact the appellants came to know about thisafter the permit in question was issued.
...........omissis...........
In the light of considerations of law, the appellants refer to the judgements Ivan Portelli vs Prim Ministru et, Michael Buttgieg vs Prim Ministru et, and David Gatt vs Prim Ministru et (PA) (JA) 27th April, 2009 whereby it was stated that a fair hearing includes the principle of ‘audi alteramem partem’. This is one of the basic principles of natural justice, and the Court does not agree it is not to be absolutely applied, as the defendant’s opinion was. The principlethat no one should be condemned or deprived of his rights without being heard, and above all without having received notice that his rights would be put to stake is of a universal equity. Nothing less would be necessary than an express declaration of the legislature to put aside this requirement. (L-Alliance des Professuers Catholiques de Montreal vs Labour Relations Board of Quebec-1953, repoted in the Manuel, the Application of the European Convention Human Rights J.E.S. Fawcett –page 148).
In this case it appears clear that the Tribunal did not adhere with this basic principle, till the end of the procedures, becausethe appellants were ignoredat this stagebetween the stage of the decision and the issuing of the permit.
...........omissis...........
That in Evans De Smith Judicial Review of Administratice Action, (4th Edit. Page 196), it is statedthat Natural Justice generally requires that the persons liable to be directly affected by the proposed administrative acts, decisions, or proceedings be given adequate notice of what is proposed.
...........omissis...........
In this case, it thus clearly emerges that the appellants were deprived of this right because certainly when the permits were issued after the inconclusive decision of the Tribunal, the appellants had not been given ‘notice whatsoever of the action taken or proposed to be taken’. Subsequentlyit follows that the appellants at the later stage were not in a position ‘to make representations on their own half’, and thus there was a violation of the principle of audi alteram partem.
In this regard, the appellants made it clearthat they are reserving their constitutional position.
The Third Grievance
The third grievance relates to another point of lawbecause despite that the Tribubnal pointed out what were the problems due in the development in virtue of thepartial decisiongiven by the same Tribunal,the problems raised were still not addressed because the final permissionas issued by the Authority does not respect the policy 3.8 of DC 2007.
Thus the appellant whilst referring to the proof already produced and reserving to bring further proof according to law, and to make further submissions respectfully praysthat this Honourable Court of Appealupholds its grievances and revokes, cancels and annuls its decisions of the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal et of the 29th March, 2012 and revokes the development permit wth numberPA/02610/07, or in default that the relative process be sent back to the Tribunalin order to decide the dispute according to law.
With costs of both instances against the respondent Authority.
The Appeal Application in the names Michael Tabone et vs The Malta Environment and Planing Authority, application number 144/12 MCH, has been appointed for hearing to the 7th July, 2014 at 9.00 a.m.
Appellants: c/o 51, Triq San Pawl Milqi, Burmarrad.
Respondents: 1. ...........omissis...........
2. Tony Gauci, ‘Chez Nous’, Triq il-Wied, Mosta.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 690
690By a decree given by the Civil Court First Hall, on the 12th March, 2014 on the application of Volksbank Malta Limited, Thursday, 29th May, 2014 at half past eleven in the morning (11.30 a.m.), for the Sale by Auctionto be held on the first floor, Courts of Justice, Republic Street, Valletta,of the following properties:
The tenement numbered sixteen (16), in Triq il- Karmnu, St Julians, including the garden and the overlying space, which tenement overlies part of property numbered fifteen (15), free and unencumbered, with all its rights and enjoyments.
The tenement numbered fifteen (15), in Triq il- Karmnu, St Julians, underlying tenement numbered sixteen (16), free and unencumbered, with all its rights and enjoyments.
The two garages (2) unofficially numbered seven (7) and eight (8), without airspace, forming part of a block of apartments and underlying garages, which garages are accessible from a common entrance numbered twenty (20), named ‘Navillus’, in Triq Lapsi, St Julians, free and unencumbered, with all their rights and enjoyments.
The said tenements are free and unencumbered, together valued at six hundred and fifty thousand Euro (€650,000).
The said tenements are the property of Dr Patrick Valentino et nomine.
N.B. The said tenements will be sold as described in the acts of the file number 102/13.
Rudolph Marmarà
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Bann for Curators
691Republic of Malta
To The Marshall of the Court
By means of a decree by this Court, on the 4th April, 2014 following a request of Joseph Bonello, it was ordered that deputy curators be chosen to represent the unknown heirs in the records of the Schedule of Deposit and redemption of Groundrent in the names Joseph Bonello vs Deputy Curators, and in the relative and subsequent acts.
By means of a Schedule of Deposit and contextualredemption of Sub Groundrent filed in the First Hall Civil Court, in the names Joseph Bonello and Carmen née Galea, born and residing in Birkirkara, holder of identity card number 211655 (M) vs Deputy Curators to represent the unknown heirs of Notary John Spiteri Maempeland Architect Paul Mercieca, on the 25th March, 2014 the interpellant respectfully pleaded:
That in virtue of a contract of the 18th January, 1961 in the records of Notary Angelo Sammut, father of the interpellant acquired from a certain Antonio Casha, the garage named ‘Joe’, situated in Ganu Street, Birkirkara.
That from searches it results that on the said premises there were imposed various groundrents and various annual and perpetual subgroundrents.
That on the 22nd April, 1953 by means of a contract in the records of Notary Carmelo Giuseppe Vella, the Noble Baron Fraine De Piro D’Amico Inguanez conceded to Carmelo and Giorgio siblings Aquilina, a plot of land in Birkirkaratowards the groundrent indicated in the contract.
That subsequently by means of another contract in the records of Notary Angelo Sammut, dated 16th February, 1954 Notary John Spiteri Maempel and Architect Paul Mercieca acquired from the siblings Aquilina three portions of the above mentioned land towards the groundrent indicated in the contract.
That on the 22nd January, 1959 by means of a contract in the records of Notary Angelo Sammut, Antonio Casha, purchased from the said Notary John Spiteri Maempel and Architect Paul Mercieca, a portion of land towards the groundrent indicated in the contract.
That finally the father of the interpellant in virtue of a contract of the 18th January, 1961 in the records of Notary Angelo Sammut, acquired from a certain Antonio Casha, the garage with the name ‘Joe’, in Triq Ganu, Birkirkara, towards the subgroundrent of €6.99 in favour of Antonio Casha, and the subgroundrent of €4.66which had to be paid to various persons in smaller portions.
That from searches it results that circa €0.70 had to be paid to Carmelo and Giorgio, siblings Aquilina, and €1.56 in favour of Notary John Spiteri Maempel and Architect Paul Mercieca, however the interpellant shall redeem the same for the value of €4.66 by depositing the sum of €93.20 which represent the said groundrent capitalised at 5% to be wthdrawn according to law after the due receipt is left.
Notify: (1) Deputy Curators, Courts of Justice, Valletta.
(2) Director Pubic Registry, Evans Building, Valletta (x2 services).
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. Madam Justice Lorraine Schembri Orland, LLD Doctor of Laws.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 692
692It is being notified that by a decree dated 24th April, 2014 given by the Court of Magistrates (Malta) as a Court of Criminal Inquiry, (Magistrate Dr Consuelo Scerri Herrera LLD), after an application filed by Sergio Agius on the 13th March, 2014 compilation number 219/2014 in the case: The Police (Inspector Rennie Stivala) versus Sergio Agius, 35 years, Crane Operator at the Freeport, son of Philip and Mary Grace née Gatt, born in Attard, on the 10th April, 1978 and residing at 356, ‘Atlantis’, Il-Vitorja Street, Qormi, and holder of identity card bearing number 232478M, acceded to the request of Sergio Agius in the sense that the Court authorises HSBC Bank Malta plc to pay monthly the sum of two hundred and seventy two Euro and fifty four cents (€272.54) from the Bank account of the accused bearing number 054108402050 to the home loan account bearing number 16041574, and to pay monthly the sum of sixty three Euro and ninety five cents (€63.95) from the bank account of the accused bearing number 054108402050 to the loan account bearing number 16056584.
The publication of this order is being published in terms of Article 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, Cap. 373 of the Laws of Malta, and Article 23A of the Criminal Code, Cap. 9 of the Laws of Malta, following another publication made on the 7th March, 2014 after a decree dated 28th February, 2014 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 immovable property which may be due to, or belonging to Sergio Agius.
Dr Yvette Borg LLD
For the Registrar Criminal Courts and Criminal Tribunals
Notice 693
693By a decree delivered by the Court of Magistrates (Gozo), Superior Jurisdiction, General Section, on the 9th of April, 2014 and after a decree dated 29th of April, 2014 in judicial sale number 15/2014 in the names, Dr Carmelo Galea noe vs Gillian Earl, Monday, 28th July, 2014 at 10.00 a.m. instead of Monday, 16th of June, 2014 has been scheduled for the Sale by Auction to be held at the Gozo Court’s edifice in Cathedral Square, Victoria, Gozo, of the following properties:
The flat internally marked number 7, forming part of the block of flats without number known as ‘Patrick Court’, Block A, Triq il-Kappillan Franġisk Mizzi, formerly new street in Triq Simirat, Għajnsielem, Gozo, together with garage internally marked 2 in basement level, underlying and forming part of the same block, the whole forming part of ‘Patrick Court’ Block A and Block B, built on a plot of land of 370 square metres, and bounded on the North with the street, on the South with property of Patrick Mercieca, and on other sides with property of the Gozo Diocese, valued at €180,000.
This property pertain to one half (1/2) to Veronica Flores Castro Thompson, and the other one half (1/2) to Gillian Earl, and this as better described in the judgement of the 25th of October, 2013 in lawsuit number 19/2013 in the names, Dr Carmelo Galea noe versus Gillian Earl, decided by the Court of Magistrates (Gozo), Superior Jurisdiction, General Section, and the said property will be sold as described in the report made by AIC Alex Bigeni on the 13th of March, 2013.
Daniel Sacco
For the Registrar Gozo Courts And Tribunals
Notice 694
694By means of a dccree given on the 21st October, 2013 by the Rent Regulation Board, in the records of the Sworn Application, in the names Borg Bonaci Carmelo et vs Filletti Joseph, Application number 63/13 GG, 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 an Application filed in the Rent Regulation Board, in the names Carmelo Borg Bonaci (ID 431041M), Salvatore Borg Bonaci (ID 4044M), Elia Borg Bonaci(ID 543846M), Francis Borg Bonaci (ID 1053848M), and Gaetano Borg Bonaci (ID 856053M) vs Joseph Filletti, on the 6th June, 2013 the applicants Carmelo Borg Bonaci et asked that they be authorised by this Honourable Board not to renew the lease of the premises 1, Elia, GGE, Triq Reġjonali, Santa Venera, in favour of the respondent, and that this Board order the respondent to vacate the same premises within a short and peremptory period fixed to him.
The Sworn Application in the names Borg Bonaci Carmelo et vs Filletti Joseph, application number 63/13 GG, has been deferred for hearing to the 22nd May, 2014 at 9.00 a.m.
Respondent: 1. Blokk Santa Marija, 17, Old Railway Track, Santa Venera.
2. Blokk Santa Marija, 17, Flat 2, Triq il-Ward, Swieqi.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Bann for Curators
694Republic of Malta
To The Marshall of the Court
By means of a decree by this Court, on the 24th September, 2012 following a request of Nathalie Xuereb Saydon, it was ordered that deputy curators be chosen to represent the unknown persons in the records of the Schedule of Deposit and contextual redemption of groundrent in the names Nathalie Xuereb Saydon vs Deputy Curators, and in the relative and subsequent acts.
By means of a Schedule of Deposit and contextualredemption of Groundrent of Nathalie Xuereb Saydon (ID 53378M), filed in the First Hall Civil Court, in the names Nathalie Xuereb Saydon, Employee, wife of Salvinu Xuereb, daughter of Joseph Saydon and Tereża née Farrugia, holder of identity card number 53378(M), born in Żurrieq and residing at ‘Anondita’, Triq Dun Matteolo Saliba, Żurrieq vs Deputy Curators to represent unknown persons on the 20th September, 2012 the interpellant Nathalie Xuereb Saydon (ID 53378M) respectfully pleaded:
That by means of a contract of acquisition of the 29th March, 2004 in the records of Notary Mario Bugeja, a copy of which is hereby annexed and marked Doc. A, the interpellant acquired the premises number 27 today numbered 47, in Triq San Mikiel, Żurrieq, bordering on both sides with properties of third parties, as subject to the annual and perpetual groundrent of €32.61, otherwise free and unencumbered,with all its rights and appurtenances.
That the interpellant does not know who are the persons entitled to receivethe groundrent in question, and is thus not in a position to deposit the funds regarding the redemption merit of this schedule against the persons who are entitled to them.
That the interpellant wishes to avail herself of the provisions of Article 1501 of Cap. 16 of the Laws of Malta, and in virtue of this redeem the annual and perpetual groundrent in question, thus depositing the sum of €652.22 which represents the sum of €32.61 capitalised at 5% in order to be freely withdrawn by the respondents after the due receipt is left according to law after their identity is established.
Depositor: Nathalie Xuereb Saydon, Anondita, Triq Dun Matteolo Saliba, Żurrieq.
Depositors: Deputy Curators, Courts of Justice, Valletta.
Notify: Director Public Registry, Triq il-Merkanti, Valletta.
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 Joseph R. MicallefLLD, Doctor of Laws.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 696
696By a decree of the Court of Magistrates (Malta) of the 2nd December, 2013 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).
Bartoli Brothers Limited (C 16827),of 11/12, M Borg Gauci Street, Tal-Ħandaq, Qormi, filed a Claim on the 31st October, 2013 whereby they asked the Court to condemn Edgar Brincat (ID 212945M),in his own name, and for and on behalf of Fusion Four of(1)St John Bastions, Valletta, (2) Lowndes Park B, Apartment 6, Alfred Gauci Street, Sliema, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €5,832.48 which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs andinterests.
The case (Notice Number 345/13FDP) is deferred for the 12th May, 2014 at 9.00 a.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 697
697By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 23rd September, 2013 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).
Go plc (C 22334), of Triq Fra Diego, Marsa MRS 1501,filed a Claim on the 19th September, 2013 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Amaliri Rebecca Susan Josephine (ID 190193M), ofManhatha Court, Flat 1, Triq l-Iskuna, San Pawl il-Baħar, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €374.74, which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs andlegal interests.
The case (Claim Number 555/13VG2) is deferred for the 7th May, 2014 at 1.00 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals