Court Notices published in Govt. Gazette No. 20,243 of 2nd August 2019

By a decree of the 24th April, 2019, 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 (Chapter 12).

That by an application filed by Dr Renzo Porsella Flores and Legal Procurator Liliana Buhagiar on the 9th of April, 2019, the said application is asking for the withdrawal of the amount of €349.41 deposited by schedule of deposit 23/19 filed in the acts of the Garnishee Order number 114/08 in the names Dr Renzo Porsella Flores et vs Carmela Bilke (ID 244670M).

The Court ordered the notification of the application to the counter party with a four (4) days period to reply.  

MARVIC FARRUGIA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

Republic of Malta

To the Marshall of the Court

By means of a decree given by this Court on the 28th December, 2018, following a request by John Cauchi et it was ordered that deputy curators be chosen to represent the unknown heirs of Agostino Bartolo and Pawla Bartolo née Gauci and the unknown heirs of Joseph Mary Fava and the unknown heirs of Salvatore Bartolo in the acts of the schedule of deposit number 2442/2018 in the names John Cauchi et vs Deputy Curators and in the other relative and subsequent acts.

By means of a schedule of deposit and and concurrent redemption of groundrent filed in the First Hall of the Civil Court, in the names John Cauchi, unemployed, son of unknown father and Concetta Cauchi, born on the 17th September, 1966, in Tal-Pietà and residing in Iklin limits of Ħal Lija holding identity card number 266481M and his wife Angela Cauchi, daughter of Saviour Grech and Maria née Grech, born on the 13th April, 1963, in Tal-Pietà and residing in Iklin limits of Ħal Lija holding identity card number 237763M vs Deputy curators to represent (1) the unknown heirs of Agostino Bartolo son of Giuseppe and Maria née Vella and his wife Pawla née Gauci; (2) the unknown heirs of Joseph Mary Fava son of Joseph and Emilia née Vella; and (3) the unknown heirs of Salvatore Bartolo son of Agostino Bartolo and Pawla née Gauci, on the 26th December, 2018, the applicants John Cauchi and Angela Cauchi respectfully submitted:

That they are the emphyteutae under title of a perpetual sub-emphyteusis     from the respondents, the premises, that is the flat number 1 forming part of a block of six flats without number holding the name Saint Mary Flats in Triq Louis F. Mizzi, Iklin, limits of Ħal Lija, which flat is situated on the ground floor, and the block is bounded from the West with the said road and from the other boundaries with property of Michael Bartolo and others or their successors in title, as subject to the annual and perpetual groundrent and subgroundrent as here under described, with all its rights and appurtenances;

The applicants acquired this flat together with the common parts by means of a public act in the records of Notary Patrick Critien dated 23rd October, 1994, and although in the said deed it is said that the premises are subject to Lm1.78 equivalent €4.15 as annual and perpetual groundrent the said premises are in fact subject to a higher subgroundrent consisting in a quarter (as for 4 flats are subject to groundrent on the block that was built on 69 square canes of land) of the following:

1. Original perpetual groundrent of 1 shilling and 9 pence per year for each square cane on 69 square canes, amounting to Lm0.08,7 x 69 = Lm6.00,3 equivalent to €13.89 due per year to the heirs of Agostino Bartolo and his wife Paola née Gauci that may be their children Giuseppe Bartolo, Salvatore Bartolo, Michele Bartolo, Antonio Bartolo, Maria mart Giacomo Camilleri and Vittoria mart Valentino Chetcuti according to the deed in the records of Notary Joseph Spiteri dated 12th August, 1951;

2. The increase on this groundrent as per the perpetual subgroundrent in the amount of three pence per year for each square cane on 69 square canes (Lm0.01,3 x 69 = Lm0.89,7) equivalent to €2.09 due per year to the unknown heirs of Joseph Mary Fava according to the contract of Notary Joseph Spiteri of the 16th April, 1952;

3. The other successive increase on the subgroundrent as per perpetual subgroundrent in the total amount on the block of Lm6.90 equivalent to €16.07, due per year to the unknown heirs of Salvatore Bartolo;

The said rate of original groundrent of the applicants of €3.05 (quarter of the total) is redeemed in favour of the heirs of Agostino and Pawla spouses Bartolo according the original consession with the rate of 3% and so the amount is of €116.67;

The increase of the subgroundrent of the applicants of €0.53 (quarter of the total) is redeemed in favour of the heirs of Joseph Mary Fava according to the relative deed at the rate of 5% and so the amount of €10.60;

The increase of the successive subgroundrent of the applicants of €4.02 (quarter of the total) is redeemed in favour of the heirs of Salvatore Bartolo according to the relative deed at the rate of 5% and so the amount of €80.40;

The applicants wish to avail themselves of the option in Article 1501 Cap. 16 of the Laws of Malta and thus redeem the same groundrent and subgroundrent at the rates mentioned above and so they are depositing the total equivalent amount with this Court so that the said groundrent is redeemed.

Thus, the applicants are calling upon this Honourable Court and under its authority are depositing the total amount of €207.67 representing the capitalisation of 3% and 5% of the subgroundrent of the said premises so that these rates of groundrent and subgroundrent will be redeemed according to law, and so that the same amounts will be redeemed as follows:

€116.67 by the heirs of Agostino and Pawla spouses Bartolo;

€10.60 by the heirs of Joseph Mary Fava; 

€80.40 by the heirs of Salvatore Bartolo.

This after leaving the relative receipts according to law.

Applicants:

4, St Mary Flats, Flat 1, Triq Louis F. Mizzi, Iklin

Service:

Director Public Registry, Triq id-Dejqa, Valletta

Registrar of Lands, Triq il-Punent, Valletta

Deputy curators

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 Grazio Mercieca, LLD, Doctor of Laws.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree given by the Civil Court (Family Section) on the 4th July, 2019, in the records of the Application Number 197/19 AL, in the names Borg Teresa vs Borg Vincent, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent Vincent Borg, in terms of Article 187(3) et sequitur of Cap. 12.

By means of an Application, filed in the Civil Court (Family Section) in the names Teresa Borg (ID 0088464M) vs Vincent Borg (ID 665661M), on the 7th May, 2019, the applicant Teresa Borg (ID 0088464M) asked this Honourable Court for the reasons premised in the application:

1. To pronounce the dissolution of the marriage between the parties and uphold the other demands in the application.

The Application Number 197/19 AL, in the names Borg Teresa vs Borg Vincent, Application Number 197/19 AL, has been deferred for hearing to Wednesday, 30th October, 2019, at 9.15 a.m.

Applicant: 11, St Mary, Flat 4, Triq F. S. Caruana, Birkirkara

Respondent: Cachia, Triq San Ġorġ, Ħal Safi

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

Whereas Saviour sive Alvin Scicluna, Loreane Scicluna, Paul Scicluna and Maria Scicluna, for any interest they might have, filed a sworn application no. 53/2019(BS)  in the names “Saviour sive Alvin Scicluna et vs Direttur tar-Reġistru Pubbliku” demanding corrections in the Act of Birth of Alvin Scicluna with progressive number six of the year one thousand nine hundred and sixty-four (6/1964), in the Act of Marriage with progressive number twenty-nine of the year one thousand nine hundred and ninety-seven (29/1997), in the Act of Birth of his son Paul Scicluna with progressive number one hundred seventy-four of the year one thousand nine hundred and ninety-eight (174/1998) and in the Act of Birth of his daughter Maria with progressive number one hundred and seventy-three of the year two thousand and one (173/2001).

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 (15) 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 writ of summons, of the day which will be appointed for the hearing of the case.

MAUREEN XUEREB

For the Registrar, Gozo Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree given by the Court of Appeal on the 18th July, 2019, in the records of the sworn application Number 1184/08 GM, in the names Greenlines Environmental Services Limited (C 14868) vs Julian Falzon (ID 787057M) the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the company Greenlines Environmental Services (C 14868) in terms of Article 187(3) et sequitur of Cap. 12.

By means of an Application, filed in the Court of Appeal in the names Greenlines Environmental Services Limited (C 14868) vs Julian Falzon (ID 787057M) on the 22nd April, 2019, the appellant Julian Falzon respectfully pleaded:

That by means of a Sworn Application in the names premised the respondent plaintiff company pleaded:

That on the 13th June, 2008, it bought from the appellant a Ford tipping truck equipped with a crane with registration number EBA 235, today GLS 017, for the price of sixteen thousand euro (€16,000);

That subsequently to this sale it resulted that this truck was subject to hidden and serious defects which render it not fit for the use it was bought;

… omissis …

That the applicant company is incurring huge damages due to the fact that it had to lease another truck in order to carry out the work which was intended to be carried out by the truck merit of this cause;

That despite that the respondent was called upon to come forward for the rescission of the sale, to take back this truck and refund the price paid by the applicant company, he remained in default;

That thus this cause had to be made.

… omissis …

Judgement Appealed

4. That by means of the judgement delived on the 28th March, 2010, in the cause in the names premised, the Court of First Instance decided to:

i. Declare that the truck with registration number EBA 235, today GLS 017, is effected by hidden defects which render it not suitable for the purpose it was bought.

ii. Declare this sale rescinded.

iii. … omissis …

iv. … omissis …

v. … omissis …

vi. Condemn the defendant to pay the same sum of €14,195.67.

With interests from the date of the judgement till the date of effective payment and with costs to be borne by the defendant.

5. That the appellant felt strongly aggrieved both by the decision given against him above mentioned and is thus filing this humble appeal.

6. That the grievances are clear and manifest and consist in the following:

7. Spectrum of the facts

… omissis …

8. The Grievances

i. That in the humble opinion of the interpellant, the Court of First Instance made a wrong appreciation both of the facts and of the law in its decision as shall be explained.

ii. That in the first place although in the report of the technical referee appointed by the Court of First Instance a fol. 21 it was concluded that ‘the truck was bent because it was excessively loaded’ … omissis … the Court whilst referring to such conclusions failed to consider them in its decision.

iii. That the Court of First Instance failed so much to consider the report of the technical referee that in the judgement appealed no reference was made to the observation of the engineer appointed by the same Court.

iv. That the fact that the respondent company made such an important change which affected the same nature of the truck by raising the loading box in order that it may take, load and carry more material, shifted all the responsibility from the interpellant qua vendor on to it qua purchaser.

v. The fact that the chassis which was bent under the excessive and double weight of who knows how many loads and burdens it was till now subjected, it manifestly results that the structural defect created by the respondent company with the change it made render the same vehicle defective and no longer good for work.

… omissis …

ix. That the judgement appealed is sometimes coloured with partisan considerations which clearly favour the plaintiff company as appears hereunder.

a) In the first place for example whilst a fol. 9 of the judgement the Court declared that it was up to the defendant to prove that the chassis was bent due to bad use by the employees of the plaintiff the same Court failed to apply the same test to the premises of the respondent company and namely that it was up to it to prove that the defect in the chassis existed at the moment of the sale.

… omissis …

So much did the damage in the vehicle de quo not exist, that before the sale the appellant used the truck regularly in order to carry machines, etc.

b) In the second place whilst the Court of First Instance was convinced of the poor version of the respondent regarding the hidden defect although the existence of the damage in the chassis before the moment of the sale was never proved, the same Court was from the beginning doubtful regarding the defence of the appellants that the damage was caused by the employees of the appellant company.

x. That without prejudice and in suppport of the above the conclusions of every expert involved in this case all point out more or less in one direction and namely that: i) the truck suffered extensive damage primarily in the chassis and other damages consequential to the sale; ii) that such damages occur after a certain time due to excessive stress; and that iii) in order to avoid such damages it is necessary that the chassis be enforced in order that it may take certain load.

xi. That furthermore although before the purchase the truck was not effected with any defect nor apparent nor latent since it did not exist, the Court of First Instance granted damages claimed by the respondent company because according to it the respondent knew of the defect.

… omissis …

xiii. That now it results that during the cause some time well after all the proof of the parties was concluded and the cause was left for judgement, the appellant was notified by the police that the truck in question had been stolen from the consegnetary with whom the appellant company had deposited it.

xiv. That without prejudice and keeping in view of the preceedeing paragraph the respondent is to suffer the loss of the truck in question in terms of Article 1430 sub-section 2 of the Civil Code Cap 16 of the Laws of Malta, provides that ‘if the thing perishes due to accident the loss is to be borne by the purchaser’.

Thus in view of the above and for the reasons premised the appellant whilst referring to all the proof already produced before the Court of First Instance and whilst reserving the right to bring all the proof permitted to him by law, humbly prays this Honourable Cvourt to cancel and revoke in whole the judgement of the First Hsall Civil Court, on the 28th March, 2019, in the names Greenlines Environmental Services Limited (C 14868) vs Julian Falzon, and consequently uphold the pleas of the appellants and reject all the pleas of the plaintiff company.

With all the costs of both instances against the respondent company.

Appellant: St Nicholas, Triq Ħal Qormi, Ħal Luqa

Respondent: Greenlines Environmental Services Limited (C 14868), Caroline Court, 5, Triq Mensija, San Ġwann

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

It is hereby notified that in virtue of the powers conferred by Section 257 of the Civil Code, the Court of Revision of Notarial Acts, by a decree dated the 18th day of July, 2019, and this after a written plea numbered 473/19, ordered:

The correction of the Act of Birth of Isaac Mckay, bearing number 4523 of the year 2012, under the column entitled ‘Particulars respecting the Father of the Child – Name and Surname of the Father, and whether living or dead’, the surname ‘Mckay’ following the name ‘Vincent’ is to be cancelled, and is to be substituted with the correct surname ‘Mc Kay’; and

The correction of the Act of Marriage of Leonid Mckay and Pauline Farrugia, bearing number 2360 of the year 2007, whereby the incorrect surname ‘Mckay’ is to be deleted wherever this appears, and is to be substituted with the correct surname ‘Mc Kay’ with regards to Leonid, Vincent and Carmen, and also including the signature of ‘Leonid Mckay’ at the bottom of the said certificate.

Court of Revision of Notarial Acts

JANET CALLEJA

Deputy Registrar, Court of Revision of Notarial Acts