Go Back
Court Notices published in Govt. Gazette No. 19,270 of 20th June 2014
01/01/2014
Notice 986
986By means of a decree given on the 30th April, 2013 by the Court of Appeal in the records of the Appeal Application, in the names Tessie, wife of Anthony Cardona et vs C. V. Builders Limited and Korporazzjoni Enemalta, Application number 2718/97 JRM, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the company C. V. Builders Limited in terms ofArticle 187 (3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.
By means of an Application filed in the Court of Appeal, in the names, Tessie, wife of Anthony Cardona, Giovanna, wife of Julian Xuereb, Helen, wife of Joseph Gatt, Mary, wife of Lawrence Debono, in her own name and as mandatary of her absent sister Lily, widow of Joseph Attard, and her brother Salvatore Mamo, Joseph Mamo, and Carmela Mamo, all as heirs of their deceased brother Spiridione Mamo vs C. V. Builders Limited and Enemalta Corporation, on the 28th December, 2012 the applicants Helen, wife of Joseph Gatt (ID 603137M), Tessie, wife of Anthony Cardona, Giovanna, wife of Julian Xuereb, Mary, wife of Lawrence Debono in her own name and as mandatary of her absent sister Lily, widow of Joseph Attard, and of her brother Salvatore Mamo, Joseph Mamo, and Carmela Mamo, all as heirs of their deceased brother Spiridione Mamo respectfully pleaded:
That the plaintiff presented a writ of summons on the 27th November, 1997 in virtue of whichfor the reasons mentionedthe plaintiffs in their capacityof siblings of Spiridione Mamo asked this Court: (a) to find thesummonedor either of them guilty for the damages suffered by them due to an accident which occurred on the 28th September, 1995 when their said brother Spiridione Mamo dieddue to an electric shock whilst he was working, (b) liquidate all the damages suffered by them due to the said accident as a result of the fault of the summoned, (c) condemn the same summoned or either of them to pay the damages so liquidated. With costs.
That the defendant corporation pleaded that it had nothing to do with what happened to the plaintiffs.
That the defendant company pleaded that it was not to blame for that which happened to Mamo because the incident did not take place due to any faults or carelessness on its part.
That in virtue of a judgement of the 12th December, 2012 in the names premised the First Hall Civil Court, presided by the Hon. Mr Justice J.R. Micallef rejected the plaintiff’s demands with costs against the plaintiff.
That the appellants felt aggrievedby this judgement, andfiled this humble appeal.
That the grievances are clear and manifest, and consist in the following:
That the Court of First Instance rejected the plaintiff’s demands because it was of the opinion that the accident at the place of work as a consequence of which Spiridione Mamo died occured solely due to the fault of the decujus.However with the due respect, the applicants submit that the Court of First Instance made a wrong appreciationof the proof and the law when it reached this conclusionbecause according to jurisprudence of these last years the Court of First Instance had to consider that the employer has a responsibilityto provide a safe system of work much hgher from that actually decided by the Court of First Instance, which responsibility is of an ex contractual nature.
...........omissis...........
Another important judgement on the matter is Emanuel Grech vs Carmelo, sive Charles Farrugia et noe (Decided by the Court of Appeal on the 7th December, 1994 (Writ of Summons 274/88).
Finally, the appellant company did not appreciate that established byjurisprudencein the interpretation of Cap. 107 regarding the objective responsibilityof employers in the industrial field, in the use of machinery, due to the necessitythat till it is possible the machinery is be be safeguarded so as not to cause any harm to any person working on it.
...........omissis...........
That thus for example in the judgement D’Anastasi vs Enemalta Corporation (Decided First Hall Civil Court on the 28th June, 2005 by Hon. Mr Justice J. Azzopardi), the First Hall Civil Court stated thus:
...........omissis...........
That this was cited by the First Hall Civil Court in another judgement in the names Anthony, sive Twanny, and Michelle, spouses Frendo vs Italmal Machinery Ltd, (Decided on the 28th June, 2005 by the First Hall Civil Court by Hon. Mr Justice J. Azzopardi) where the Court added the following:
As stated by the same Court in the cause in the names Kevin Mallia vs Alf Mizzi and Sons Limited, decided on the 9th October, 2003 an employer has the duty to provide a place of work which is not dangerous and a risk to the health of the same worker.
...........omissis...........
That in the judgement in the names Paul Debono vs Malta Drydocks, and by a decree of the 10th April, 2004 Saviour Gauci in the names of the Government of Malta as successor of the Malta Drydocks was authorised to assume the records of the cause instead of the same Malta Drydocks (Decided on the 27th April, 2005 by the First Hall Civil Court Hon. Mr. Justice P. Sciberras) (Writ of Summons 747/1996/1).
This premised it can never be doubted that the employer is bound to adopt all the suitable measures to protect his employees. This responsibility is of a contractual naturewith the consequence that for the reimbursement of damages to the person it lies on the employee to prove the default of the employer for the adoption of such measures.
That in the case in examination it results that the decujus had been employed by the defendant company only for a few days. Notwithstanding this he had been sent to work immediately as a supervisor it resultedthat in the premises where the decujus had been sent to work there was an uninsulated electricity cable, the decujus held the cable in his hands, took a shock and died.
That in the part of the considerations made by the Court of First Instance whereby it considered the responsibility of the defendant company, the Court commented in the sense that the corporationdid not have any tort in the incident because ‘it was shown that it was the responsibility of the contractorengaged to carry out the works to ask the corporation to cut out the supply.
Thenin the considerations whereby the Court of First Instance considered the responsibility of the defendant company, the Court adopted a different opinion and reached the conclusion that because the defendant company did not know that there was a cable in questionwhich carried electricity it was not in default.That in the light of that above citedregarding the contractor’s responsibility therealready resulted a default on the part of the defendant companybecause it resulted that the contractor not only did not askto cut off the electricity supply but outrightly failed to chech whether there is dangerous electricty.
That here there certainly results a serious default of supervision on the part of the defendant company.In the light of the legal considerations above made wherebyoutrightly the onus of proof is on the employer it is not enough that he stated that he knew about the cable and there was electricty supply.
...........omissis...........
That as well held by the Court of First Instance, the duty of surveillancecannot be neglected, and no prior trainingis enough in order to exempt such duty ...omissis... The defendant company chose to send the decujus to act as a supervisor and not he offered to carry out this function.Thus the defendant company cannot exonerate itself from the consequencves of such choice.
That without prejudiced to the first grievance, the second grievance is that the Court of First Instance made a wrong appreciation of the facts and the law when it concluded that as regards Enemalta there is no responsibility as well observed by the Court of First Instance a fol. 6 of the judgementa week before the accident happened a report had been made at the Enemalta Branch of the area because sparks hadbeen let off from the cable. The corporation sent a representative and he closed the service box and informedthe persons there that supply was passing through the cable.With the due respect as Enemalta informed the persons on site that the cable was dangerous was not enough to exempt itselffrom responsibility ...omissis... With the due respect Enemalta should on its initiative have cut the supply to ascertain itself that no one shall injure himself once there was this dangerous condition. Thus the Court of First Instance had to declare that Enemalta Corporation was responsible for the accident and consequently should have liquidated the damages in its regard.
Thus, the appellants humbly pray that this Honourable Court, cancels and revokes the judgement of the 12th December, 2012 in the names premised gven by the First Hall Civil Court presided by Hon. Mr Justice J.R. Micallefas demanded in this application.
Appellant: 1, St Louis, Triq San Ġużepp, San Ġwann.
Respondents: C. V. Builders Ltd, Oleander, Dr Chetcuti Street, Mosta.
...........omissis...........
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 987
987By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 4th February, 2014 the publication of the following extract was ordered for the purpose of service in terms of Article 187 (5) 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 18th October, 2013 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Giuseppe Mosciaro as director of Photo Play Limited (C 43358), of Casa Italia, Labour Road, Żabbar, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €1,115.82 which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs and legal interests.
The case (Claim Number 685/13YMS) is deferred for the 1st July, 2014 at 12.30 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 988
988By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, ofthe 9th May, 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 4th March, 2014 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Krasimir Simeonov Uzunov (ID 26126A), of The Gleneagles, Flat 5, Triq Forrest, San Ġiljan, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €600, which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs and interests.
The case (Claim Number 152/14DMA) is deferred for the 2nd July, 2014 at 12.05 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 989
989By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 6th May, 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).
WasteServ Malta Limited (C 30560), ofEkoCentre, Triq il-Latmija, Marsaskala, filed a Claim on the 26th November, 2013 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemnCarmel Mangion, known as Charles (ID 110160M), ofPalazz Virtù, Triq Tal-Virtù, Tal-Virtù, Rabat, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €742.10, which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
The case (Claim Number 775/13NHV) is postponed for hearing on the 24th June, 2014 at 12.30 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 990
990By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 27th May, 2014 Application number 480/2014 by Cecilia Borg and others, whereby they prayed that it be declared open in favour ofthe same Cecilia Borg, wife of the decujus, and in favour of John, George, Maria Micallef and Caroline Zammit, all brothers and sisters Borg, children of the decujus, the Succession ofJoseph Borg, son of the late Giorgio and Maria née Cali, born in Floriana, resided in Ibraġġ, Swieqi, Malta, anddied in Tal-Qroqq, limits of Imsida, on the 6th February, 2014 aged 90, intestate, holding identity card number 672223(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 991
991By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, ofthe 7th May, 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).
Bank of Valletta plc (C 2833), of 1/5, Misraħ San Ġorġ, Valletta VLT 1190, filed a Claim on the 15th April, 2014 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Antoine Giliberti (ID 40887M), ofFlat 2, Ent. A, Binja tal-Mensija, Triq Salvu Gatt, San Ġwann, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €2,949.80 which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs and interests.
The case (Claim Number 253/14VG2) is deferred for the 24th June, 2014 at 1.00 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 992
992NOTICE
Whereas the plaintiff Carmel, sive Charles Briffa (ID 278277M), filed an application under oath (No. 81/14RGM), demanding Correction in the Act of Birth of the minor child Isaac Briffa, number 439/2013 in the Public Registry.
Whosoever may have an interest therein and wishes to oppose that demand, is hereby called upon to do so by means of a note to be filed in the Registry of these Courts within fifteen days from the day of the publication of this present notice in the Government Gazette.
Those who within the aforesaid time shall have filed such note, shall be notified by the service of a copy of the said application under oath of the day which will be appointed for the hearing of the case.
By order of the Court.
Victor Deguara
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 993
993By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 7th February, 2014 Application number 124/2013 by Carol Grima, Francesco Bonnici, son of Giovanni and Vincenza née Attard, born on the 29th April, 1926 in Marsa, holding identity card number 308626(M), was Interdicted by means of a decree given on the 17th March, 2014.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Court and Tribunals
Notice 994
994It is hereby notified that by virtue of a decree delivered during the sitting of the 5th June, 2014 the Small Claims Tribunal (Gozo), ordered the publication of the following notice for the purposes of service in terms of Article 187 (3) of Cap. 12 of the Laws of Malta in respect of defendant Anene Johnson, of Joekate Court, Flat 3, L-Iskuna Street, St Paul’s Bay, Malta.
The plantiffs Salvu and Flavia Cassar filed a claim in the Small Claims Tribunal (Gozo) – Case number 9/2014 in the names of Cassar Salvu et vs Johnson Anene, on the 26th March, 2014 wherein they requested the Tribunal to condemn the defendant to pay them the amount of €1,300 for payment of goods. With costs and interest.
The case is differed to the 3rd July, 2014 at 8.45 a.m.
Silvana Grech
For the Registrar
Notice 995
995NOTICE BY THE REGISTRY OF THE CIVIL COURT, FIRST HALL
Whereas Franco Buttigieg et filed an application under oath (No. 512/2014/LSO), demanding Correction in the Act of Birth number 2902/1997 in the Public Registry.
Whosoever may have an interest therein and wishes to oppose that demand, is hereby called upon to do so by means of a note to be filed in the Registry of these Courts within fifteen days from the day of the publication of this present notice in the Government Gazette.
Those who within the aforesaid time shall have filed such note, shall be notified by the service of a copy of the said application under oath of the day which will be appointed for the hearing of the case.
By order of the Court.
Josette Demicoli
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 996
996By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, of the 8th April, 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 4th April, 2014 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Maria Lourdes Bailey (ID 544871M), of 3, Brug 1, Flat 4, Triq l-Ewwel ta’ Mejju, Birkirkara, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €312.57, which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs and interests.
The case (Claim Number 236/14VG2) is deferred for the 25th June, 2014 at 1.00 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 997
997By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal, ofthe 22nd May, 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 13th March, 2014 whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Martin John Easby (ID 48076A), of Flat 3, Waterside, Triq is-Salini, Marsaskala,to pay the plaintiff company the sum of€1,664.35 which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs and legal interests.
The case (Claim Number 179/14VG2) is deferred for the 25th June, 2014 at 1.00 p.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals