Court Notices published in Govt. Gazette no 20,511 of 3rd November 2020

By decree given by the Civil Court, First Hall on the 05th October, 2020, on the application of HSBC Bank Malta plc (C3177), Thursday, 10th December, 2020, at half past ten in the morning (10.30 a.m.), has been fixed for the Sale by Auction, to be held in Room Number 78, nearby the Courts Archives, Level -1, Courts of Justice, Triq ir-Repubblika, Valletta, of the following property:

Tenement officially numbered forty (40) having an entrance from a common terrace in Triq il-Kappuccini, Marsa, which tenement is overlying third parties properties with common access from external space with other residential properties. The said tenement enjoys active rights and is subject to passive servitudes that result from its relative position otherwise free and unencumbered as well including the right of usage of the stairs and passage that give access to the same property as described in the acts of Notary Anthony Abela dated thirty first January, two thousand and one (31/01/2001), and is valued at one hundred and eighty seven thousand euro (€187,000)

The said tenement is the property of Briffa Francis (ID89064M) and Briffa Vincenza (ID 130562M).

N.B. The said tenement will be sold as described in the acts of judicial sales number 58/2019.

GAETANA AQUILINA

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 26th October, 2020, and this after a written plea numbered 797/2020, Ordered:

The correction or annotation of the Act of Birth of David Sidney Smith when such Act of Birth is registered in the Public Registry of Malta so that the name and surname is registered as ‘David Mark Parry’.

Court of Revision of Notarial Acts

MARUSKA BALDACCHINO

Deputy Registrar, Court of Revision of Notarial Acts

By means of a decree given by the Court of Appeal,on the 8th October 2020,in the records of the Application Number 556/2015, in the names Anthony Meli and Ynskje Meli vs John Bugeja, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondents John Bugeja and Louiselle Bugeja, in terms of Article 187(3) et sequitur of Cap. 12.

By means of a Notice issued by the Registry of the Superior Courts, on the 10th June 2020, and whereas the procedures in writing before the Court of Appeal,between Anthony Meli and his wife Ynskje Meli vs John Bugeja, have been closed,the Court fixed the hearing of this casuse on Tuesday, twenty third (23) of June 2020 at 9.30 a.m. and deferred to the 3rd November at 9.05 a.m.

Respondents:John Bugeja , 27, Triq il-Freres, Sliema.

Louiselle Bugeja, 20, Flat 1, Triq Farsons, Ħamrun.

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree given, by the Constitutional Court, on the 15th September, 2020, in the records of the Application in the names Grace Spiteri et, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of Amabile Grech, in terms of Article 187(3) et sequitur of Cap.12.

By means of an Application, filed, in the Constitutional Court, Sworn Application Number 100/2016/1 JZM, in the names Grace Spiteri (ID 532555M) vs The Attorney General, and by decree of the 30th January 2020, the name of the respondent ‘Attorney General’ came to read ‘State Advocate’ and by decree of the 10th January, 2019,there were called into the cause Amabile Grech, the Malta Environment and Planning Authority, General Services Board and Architect Marvin Ellul, on the 30th July, 2020, the applicant Grace Spiteri (ID 532555M) respectfully pleaded,

That by means of a Sworn Application in the names premised the interpellant appellant pleaded,

1. That the interpellant applicant is a plaintiff in procedures before the First Hall Civil Court, in the cause number 100/2015, which started to be heard before Mr Justice Lawrence Mintoff, in the names Grace Spiteri vs Amabile Grech et, which cause relates to a building which she built on the back of her residence and of her siblings which building does not respect the legal distance from her property;

2.That the interpellant applicant by means of an application filed on Thursday 27th October, 2016, in the procedures mentioned asked for the abstention of the Hon. Mr Justice Mintoff in the light that she was not at all happy and satisfied with the proceeding of the cause due to his attitude,

… omissis …

5. That however by means of a provision given on the 31st October, 2016, the First Hall Civil Court, rejected the request for abstention and ordered the continuing of the cause,

6. That consequently the interpellant had to resort to the filing of these constitutional procedures in terms of Article 39 of the Constitution of Malta and Article 6 of the European Convention on Fundamental Human Rights) Article 6 of the First Schedule of Cap 319 of the Laws of Malta),

… omissis …

8. That the interpellant shall pass to address her constitutional complaint by examing the matter,

… omissis …

11. That the Articles of Law which regulate the challenge of the judiciary are found in Articles 733 et. seq of Cap 12 of the Laws of Malta,

… omissis …

Thus in view of that brought forward in the application the interpellant humbly prays that for the reasons above mentioned and those that can result during the pleadings of these procedures as well as saving any necessary and oportune declation this Honourable Court,

1. Declare that there is or there can be a violation of the fundamental rights of a fair hearing on the basis of Article 39 of the Constitution of Malta and Article 6 of the Convention regarding Fundamental Human Rights (Regulated by Cap 319 of the Laws of Malta) and this as regards Article 378 of Cap 12 of the Laws of Malta and the relative laws as applied in the cause 1009/2015, presided by the Hon. Mr. Justice Lawrence Mintoff, in the names Grace Spiteri et vs Amabile Grech et and uphold the other demands in this application.

2. Reply of the respondent Attorney General (today State Advocate).

… omissis …

3. Reply of the party called into the cause General Services Board

… omissis …

4. Reply of the party called into the case The Malta Environment and Planning Authority (today the Planning Authority)

5. Reply of the party called into the cause Amabile Grech

6. Judgement Appealed

That by means of a judgement given on the 13th July, 2020, the cause in the names premised the First Court decided that without prejudice to that decided as regards the head of costs by the Constitutional Court in the judgement of the 25th April, 2018, as the applicant waived the merit during the proceedings and as today’s decision is limited only to the head of costs for all the reasons premised it is deciding by ordering the applicant to pay the other costs of this cause.

That the appellant feels well aggrieved by the decision given against her above mentioned and is thus humbling filing this appeal.

… omissis …

8. The grievances

… omissis …

Thus in view of the above and for the reasons premised the appellant whilst referring to all the proof produced before the First Court and whilst reserving the right to bring forward all the proof permitted by law humbly prays this Honourable Court, erase, revoke and cancel the judgement given on the 13th July, 2020, in the names Grace Spiteri (ID 532555M) vs The Attorney General and by decree of the 30th January 2020, the name of the respondent ‘Attorney General’ came to read ‘State Advocate’ and by decree of the10th, January, 2019, there wee called into the cause Amabile Grech, the Malta Environment and Planning Authority’ General Services Board and Architect Marvin Ellul, (Sworn Application number 100/2016/1 JZM) and reform it in the sense that it orders that each party pays its costs.

Whereas the procedures in writing in the cause before the Constitutional Court between Grace Spiteri vs The Attorney General and by decree of the 30th January, 2020, the name of the respondent ‘Attorney General’ came to read ‘The State Advocate’ and by decree of the 10th January, 2019, there were called into the cause Amabile Grech, The Malta Environment and Planning Authority, General Services Board and Architect Marvin Ellul, the Court fixed the hearing of this cause on Monday ninth (9) of November, 2020, at 9.00 a.m.

Notify: Amabile Grech, 43, Flat 1, Triq il-Palazzi, Żejtun

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By a decree given on the 15th October, 2020, by the Civil Court First Hall (previously Commerce 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 Organization and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

That by an application filed by Bank of Valletta plc (C2833) on the 5th of June, 2020, is asking for the withdrawal of € 24,260.42 by Bank of Valletta plc deposited by the schedule of deposit number 1/1992 in the names of:

Following garnishee order number 3482/1991: Michael Fenech in his name vs Legal Procurator Joseph Zammit in the name and in representation of Bank of Valletta plc (C2833) vs Michael Fenech in his name; 

Following garnishee order number 3481/1991: Michael Fenech in his name vs Legal Procurator Joseph Zammit in the name and in representation of Bank of Valletta plc (C2833) vs Michael Fenech in his name. 

The Court ordered the notification of the application to Michael Fenech with a six (6) day period to reply from its notification. 

GAETANA AQUILINA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

ARB/C048/2020 – NEW FREEZING ORDER 

IT IS BEING NOTIFIED that by a decree dated 28th October, 2020, given by the Court of Magistrates (Malta) as a Court of Criminal Inquiry (Magistrate Dr Natasha Galea Sciberras LLD). Compilation number 571/2020 in the case:

The Police 

(Inspector Mark Anthony Mercieca)

(Inspector Steven Ryan Micallef)

Versus

JUDITH BAKOUSH, unemployed, 29 years, daughter of Ali Abdullah Omer Bakoush and Jane née Zammit, born in Tal-Pietà, Malta, on the 28th December, 1990, residing at 56, Triq l-Isptar, Valletta, Malta, and holder of Maltese identity card bearing number 33691M. 

ORDERED the attachment in the hands of third parties in general of all moneys and other movable or immovable property due to or pertaining or belonging to JUDITH BAKOUSH and prohibits the said accused from transferring, pledging, hypothecating or otherwise disposing of any movable or immovable property, and this according to Section 22A of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 101 of the Laws of Malta, and Section 23A of the Criminal Code, Cap. 9 of the Laws of Malta.

Any person who acts in contravention of the court order mentioned in Section 22A and Section 23A referred to above shall be guilty of an offence and shall on conviction be liable to a fine (multa) not exceeding eleven thousand and six hundred and forty-six euro and eighty-seven cents (€11,646.87), or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding twelve months, or to both such fine and imprisonment.

Any transfer or other disposal of any property made in contravention of the said Court order shall be null and without effect at law. 

THE DIRECTOR, ASSET RECOVERY BUREAU

ARB/C049/2020 – NEW FREEZING ORDER 

IT IS BEING NOTIFIED that by a decree dated 28th October, 2020, given by the Court of Magistrates (Malta) as a Court of Criminal Inquiry  (Magistrate Dr Natasha Galea Sciberras, LLD). Compilation number 572/2020, in the case:

The Police 

(Inspector Mark Anthony Mercieca)

(Inspector Steven Ryan Micallef)

Versus

MORAT ABDIKADIR MOHAMMED NASWAN, employee, 30 years, son of Abdikadir and Bedria née Krema, born in Libya on the 5th September, 1990, residing at 56, Triq l-Isptar, Valletta, and holder of Maltese identity card bearing number 137257A. 

ORDERED the attachment in the hands of third parties in general of all moneys and other movable or immovable property due to or pertaining or belonging to MORAT ABDIKADIR MOHAMMED NASWAN and prohibits the said accused from transferring, pledging, hypothecating or otherwise disposing of any movable or immovable property, and this according to Section 22A of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 101 of the Laws of Malta, and Section 23A of the Criminal Code, Cap. 9 of the Laws of Malta.

Any person who acts in contravention of the court order mentioned in Section 22A, and Section 23A referred to above shall be guilty of an offence and shall on conviction be liable to a fine (multa) not exceeding eleven thousand and six hundred and forty-six euro and eighty-seven cents (€11,646.87), or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding twelve months, or to both such fine and imprisonment.

Any transfer or other disposal of any property made in contravention of the said Court order shall be null and without effect at law. 

MR BRIAN FARRUGIA

THE DIRECTOR, ASSET RECOVERY BUREAU

By means of a decree given by the Court of Appeal, on the 30th September 2020, by this Court (LM) in the records of the Appeal 26/16 LM, in the names Muscat Clint et vs Scicluna Matthew et, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent Matthew Scicluna, in terms of Article 187(3) et sequitur of Cap. 12.

By means of an Application, filed, in the Court of Appeal, Application 26/16 LM, in the names Clint Muscat and Martina Vella vs Claire Caruana and Matthew Scicluna, on the 4th May, 2020, the appellant Claire Caruana (ID 434092M) respectfully pleaded,

Preliminary

1. By means of the cause brought forward in first instance the plaintiffs demanded the refund of the sum of (€ 5,648) paid according to them to two defendants for works related to a contract of works which were not carried out or were not carried out according to the trade or art. The defendant here appellant replied that she did not enter into any contract of works with the plaintiff.

2. By means of a judgement given on the 4th March, 2020,by the Court of Magistrates, the Court, rejected the pleas brought forward by the appellant Claire Caruana and condemned the respondents in solidum between them to refund the sum demanded with interests and with costs at the charge of the respondents in solidum between them.

3.That the interpellant felt aggrieved by this judgement and and filed this humble appeal.

4.The First grievance – the appellant Claire Caruana has no juridical relationship with the plaintiffs.

5.The Court of First Instance considered well the only exercise it had to do ‘to see whether in fact there was a juridical relationship between the plaintiffs and the respondents or either of whom. This because the other respondent Matthew Scicluna brought forward no reply and remained in default whilst the only plea of the interpellant Claire Caruana, was in the sense that she had no juridical relationship with the plaintiffs.

6.The Court of First Instance was mistaken when it concluded that the interpellant ‘brought forward no proof to show that the applicants had a limited relationship with the respondent Matthew Scicluna’.

… omissis …

11.It is a well established principle that ‘normally a person contracts on his own behalf unless he indicates that he is contracting on behalf of others … omissis … the burden of proof that the contracting party has done so on behalf of another lies on the party making the allegation.

12.Matthew Scicluna thus contracted on his own behalf and never indicated that he was also contracting in the name of Claire Caruana.

… omissis …

16. Despite this the Court of First Instance created an obligation which does not exist between the applicant and the respondent Claire Caruana, when the version of the plaintiffs is that of business limited and exclusively with the other respondent Matthew Scicluna.

… omissis …

18.In the light of all this the interpellant considers not only that the Court of First Instance should have freed her from the observance of the judgement but that the judicial costs incurred by her should have been borne by the plaintiffs themselves that uselessly summoned the interpellant.

C. The Second Grievance: The VAT receipts do not create a juridical relationship

19. The Court of First Instance concluded that the juridical relationship between the plaintiffs and the respondent Claire Caruana was created simply because the interpellant had a VAT book in her name, from which two receipts were issued to the plaintiffs.

20. However this fact alone does not render her a participant in the business which as admitted by the plaintiffs themselves was exclusively with the respondent Matthew Scicluna.

… omissis …

31.From all this it follows that as the plaintiffs always talked and negotiated directly with Matthew Scicluna and as it does not result that CC Turnkey Projects is a company or commercial partnership according to law it is only Matthew Scicluna who has to pay for the plaintiffs’ claim.

D. The Third Grievance Cheques issued in favour of the interpellant do not create a juridical relationship

32. The Court of First Instance concluded also that the juridical relationship between the plaintiffs and the respondent Claire Caruana arose because the plaintiffs issued two cheques in her favour to pay the respondent Matthew Scicluna.

33. However even this fact is immaterial because the cheques were given to the defendant Matthew Scicluna and were only intended to pay the same Matthew Scicluna for the works he promised to do for them.

35. It results not only that the cheques which were given to respondent Matthew Scicluna were issued as a payment of services he had to render but it results that the interpellant made no benefit from all this.

E. Demand

36.Thus the appellants pray this Honourable Court to vary the judgement of the Court of Magistates, in the names Clint Muscat and Martina Vella vs Claire Caruana and Matthew Scicluna, decided on the 4th March, 2020, as demanded in this Appeal Application, with costs of the appellants of both instances , to be borne by the respondent plaintiffs.

By means of a Notice of Hearing of a cause issued by the Registry Superior Courts on the 31st August, 2020, and wheres the written procedures in the cause before the Court of Appeal, between Clint Muscat and Martina Vella vs Claire Caruana and Matthew Scicluna, have been closed, the Court, fixed the hearing of this cause for pleadings on Wednesday thirteeth (30) of September, 2020, and deferred to the 11th November, 2020, at 11.50 a.m.

Notify: Matthew Scicluna, 44, Triq Biċċieni, Sqaq Numru 8, Ħaż-Żabbar

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

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 4th March, 2019, following a request by Architect Joseph Xuereb for and on behalf of the company Gevimida Limited it was ordered that deputy curators be chosen to represent the unknown sub-owners heirs of Carmelo Magro and Salvatore Buhagiar in the acts of the schedule of deposit number 442/2019 in the names Architect Joseph Xuereb for and on behalf of the company Gevimida Limited vs Notary Doctor Pierre Cassar and deputy curators and Advocate Peter Caruana Galizia as procurator of Roger Vella Bonavita, and Martin Vella Bonavita (as heirs of Joseph Vella Bonavita) and in the other relative and subsequent acts.

By means of a schedule of deposit and concurrent redemption of ground rent and sub groundrent filed in the First Hall of the Civil Court, in the names Architect Joseph Xuereb, son of Captain Serafin Scuereb sive Xuereb, son of Serafin and Elvira née Manche, born in Paola and residing in Kappara, San Gwann (ID 108728M) for and on behalf of the company Gevimida Limited (C3558) duly authorised vs Notary Dr Pierre Cassar, son of Notary George Cassar and Miriam née Vassallo, born in San Giljan on the 25th December, 1960, and residing in Swieqi (ID 52761M); deputy curators nominated to represent the heirs of Carmelo Magro, son of Giuseppe and Crocefissa née Abela, born in Ħaż-Żabbar and resided in Ħaż-Żabbar and the heirs of Salvatore Buhagiar, son of the late Antonio and Mattia née Grech, born in Ħaż-Żabbar and resided in Ħaż-Żabbar as subowners; Advocate Peter Caruana Galizia, son of John and Marcelle née Mamo, born in Tas-Sliema and resided in Bidnija, limits of Mosta (ID 30056M) as procurator of Roger Vella Bonavita and Martin Vella Bonavita, children of the late Joseph and Mary née Calleja Gera, born in San Ġiljan and residing in Australia (as heirs of Joseph Vella Bonavita) duly authorised, as owners, filed on the 1st March, 2019, the applicant company Gevimida Limited respectfully submitted:

That by means of a contract in the acts of Notary Francis Micallef dated 9th February, 1977, the company Gevimida Limited bought from Architect Joseph Scuereb sive Xuereb, a copy of which is here attached and marked as Document A, the ground floor tenement with number 68 previously 52 with the name Saint Stephen in Saint Michael Street, Fgura, as subject to the annual and perpetual groundrent and subgroundrent of Lm6 equivalent to €13.98. Plan of the same premises is here attached and marked as document X;

From the amount of €13.98, the amount of €13.80 is due to Notary Pierre Cassar, as heir of his father Notary George Cassar who acquired the sub direct dominium, by means of a contract in the records of Notary Maurice Gambin dated 22nd April, 1963, and the remaining €0.18 due as for the amount of €0.01 to Advocate Doctor Peter Caruana Galizia nomine as heir of Joseph Vella Bonavita and as owner according to the contract in the records of Notary Joseph Raymond Grech dated 29th March, 1952, and as for €0.17 to the heirs of Carmelo Magro and Salvatore Buhagiar, as sub-owner, according to the contract in the records of Notary George Cassar dated 24th July, 1959.

The applicants wish to avail themselves of the option given to them in terms of article 1501 of the Civil Code and redeem the same annual and perpetual groundrent and sub groundrent of €13.98 of the premises above mentioned.

Thus the applicants are humbly calling upon this Honourable Court and under its authority are depositing the amount of €279.60, which amount represents the redemption of the said annual and perpetual subgroundrent regarding the said tenement , as above mentioned, at the rate established of 5% so that this amount, as for the sum of €260 be paid to Notary Pierre Cassar, as for the amount of €0.20 be paid to Advocate Dr Peter Caruana Galizia nomien and as for the amount of €3.40 for the said deputy curators to represent the heirs of Carmelo Magro and the heirs of Salvatore Buhagiar and these under all those directions according to law and this after leaving the relative receipt according to law.

Applicant: Architect Joseph Scuereb sive Xuereb, 48, Ciel de Bleu, Triq Anton Schembri, Il-Kappara, San Ġwann

Notification Notary Pierre Cassar LLD, 51 Flat 1A, Old Bakery Street, Valletta

Adv. Peter Caruana Galizia, 56, Melita Street, Valletta

Deputy Curators to represent the heirs of Carmelo Magro and Salvatore Buhagiar

Director of Public Registry, Identity Malta, Triq il-Punent, 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. Justice Anna Felice, LLD, Doctor of Laws.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree of the 14th October, 2020, of the Rent Regulation Board, in the records of the Application in the names Renato Caruana vs Joseph Gatt, Application number 117/2020CG, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of effecting service on the respondent Joseph Gatt in terms of Article 187(3) et sequitur of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap 12)

By means of an application in the names Renato Caruana (ID 0466879M) vs Joseph Gatt (ID 0171150M) filed before the Rent Regulation Board on the 13th July, 2020, the applicant Renato Caruana (ID 0466879M) humbly request:

That the applicant leased to the respondent the premises that are found in number 19, Triq l-Imħazen, Floriana, and this by means of a private writing;

That the period of the lease was of 21 years that is from the year 1988 till the year 2009 and there was not extension and/or new lease;

Although the period of the lease expired the respondent is refusing to vacate and evict from the said premises for no valid reason at law;

In addition, the respondent failed to effect the necessary maintance in the premises in question and this as according to Law with the result that several rooms in the premises have extensive damages;

In any case the respondent now is occuyping the said premises without any valid title at law and the applicant does not wish that the respondent remains in the possession of the premises in question and has all the interest that the premises are immediately be vacated;

The respondent has several other residences where to reside without any trouble;

That the respondent was solicited by means of a judicial letter dated 9th March, 2020, holding number 599/2020 duly notified on the 25th May, 2020, which copy is being here attached and marked as Doc. A;

Thus, in view of the above the applicant requests this Honourable Rent Regulation Board to declare and decide that the lease of the premises in question expired ipso iure and so the respondent has to vacate from the premises found at 19, Triq l-Imħazen, Floriana, and return back the possession to the applicant:

1.  Orders the respondent so that he immediately vacates and evicts from the premises in question without any issues and this because he has several properties where he can reside;

2. Declares that the respondent is obliged to pay compensation to the applicant for the occupation of the premises in question for every day that he is occuyping without any valid title at law;

3. Orders the respondent to pay the applicant the amount liquidated;

4. Declares that the respondent is responsible for all the payments in connection with the water and electricity services of the premises in question till the date of effective eviction and liquidates the amount due in this regard from the respondent to the applicant;

5. Orders the respondent to pay the applicant the amount liquidated in request number 4.

With all costs against the respondent including any further costs till the effective eviction against the respondent who is from now summoned so that a reference to his oath be made.

Applicant: 12, Triq San Tumas, Floriana

Notification: Joseph Gatt, 19, Triq l-Imħażen, Floriana

The application in the names Renato Caruana vs Joseph Gatt, Application number 117/2020CG, has been postponed for hearing to the 19th November, 2020, at 9.20 a.m. 

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree, given by the First Hall Civil Court, on the 5th October, 2020, in the records of the Application in the names Commissioner for Revenue vs Phenix Limited, Application number 639/2020 FDP, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent Phenix Limited in, of Article 187(3) et sequitur of Cap. 12.

By means of an Application, filed, in the First Hall Civil Court, in the names Commissioner for Revenue vs Phenix Ltd (C57845) on the 28th July, 2020, the Commissioner for Revenue, respectfully pleaded:

That Council Directive No. 2010/24/EU, regarding namely the Mutual Assistance for the Recovery of Claims relating to Taxes, Duties and Other Measures of the of the 16th March, 2010, promotes and regulates collaboration between Member States in respect of recovery or/and duties owed by debtors of one Member State who are present in another Member’s State territory and other measures;

That the Directive has been implimented in the Laws of Malta by virtue of the said Order transposed in Legal Notice 153 of 2012, which Order has come into force on the 1st January 2012 and permits the Minister responsible of Finance and Financial Services otherwise the comptent authority to collect the tax owed in the name of other Member States where the debtor is present in Malta;

That in terems of the mentioned Directive, the competent authority of Finland, otherwise the applicant authority, has made a claim for assistance to the Commissioner for Revenue, acting on behalf of the Minister responsible for Finance and Financial Services, so that the applicant revetrs tax that is owed to the applicant authority;

That the respondent company owes tax to the applicant Authortiy of Finlad in the amount of one hundred seventy five thousand, one hundred and sixty three Euro and sixy cents (€ 175,163.60) as results from the Uniform Enforcement Instrument here attached and marked as Doc. A together with interest due by law;

That the respondent company has been indicated as being present in Malta and thus the applicant is hereby proceeding to collect the mentioned am+ount since the same debt is deemed to be owed to the applicant Commissioner for Revenue in terms of article 9 of the mentioned Legal Notice;

That the applicant is satisfied that the requisites imposed by the mentioned Directive have been met with respect to this claim for recovery;

That furthermore the respondent company has a right to a translation of the attached document into any one of the official languages of the European Union or of he requested Member State if available. A document is being hereby attached and marked as Doc. B to inform the respondent company that it may request the mentioned translation witrhin seven (7)(days of service of the mentiond document.

To that extent and in view of the above the applicant respectfully requests that in accordnsace to sub-Articles 9(6) and (7) of the mentioned Legal Notice, this Honourable Court in the first instance orders a copy of this applicatioin together with the documents hereby attached anbd marked as Doc. A and Doc. B to be served upon the respondenbt company according to Cap. 12 of the Laws of Malta, and in the second instance to order the registration of the document hereby attached and marked as Doc. A as an official copy such that the said document constitues executive title.

The Application in the names Commissioner for Revenue, Application number 639/2020 FDP, has been deferred for hearing to the 25th November, 2020, at 9.15 a.m.

Applicant: Commissioer for Revenue, Office of the Commissioner for Revenue, Floriana FRN 0170

Respondent: 60/23, Triq Melita, Valletta

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals