Mur Lura
Court Notices published in Govt. Gazette No. 19,180 of the 10th December 2013
01/01/2013
Notice 1954
1954By means of a decree given, of the 17th September, 2013 by the Court of Appeal, in the records of the Appeal Application, in the names Michael Angelo Fenechvs Joseph Gaffarena, Application number 244/11 MCH, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent Michael Angelo Fenech, in terms of Article 187(3) et. of Cap. 12.
By means of an Appeal Application filed in the Court of Appeal, Sworn Application 244/11 MCH, in the names Michael Angelo Fenech vs Joseph Gaffarena, the applicant Joseph Gaffarena ID 251451(M) respectfully pleaded:
That by means of a sworn application in the names above mentioned the respondent applicant asked the Honourable First Court:
(1) Whilst finding the respondent responsible for the damages caused to the applicant resulting from the facts declared in brief in the application consisting in: (i) legal expenses in connection with the letters and with an enforcement notice;(ii) transport expenses for the machinery,and (iii) damages for the occupation of the property of the interpellant, liquidate the damages mentioned and condemn the respondent to pay them with interests, till the date of effective payment.
(2) Order the respondentto collect the machinery in question at his expense, and in default of this within a short and peremptory period fixed by this Court, authorise the applicant to remove or/and himself destroythe same vehicles in question at the expense of the respondent.
(3) With costs as demanded.
That the interpellant appellant rebutted these demands by claiming:
(1) In the first place the lack of the integrity of the proceedings since the vehicles indicated are still property of tal-Barrani Co Ltd and registered in the name of the commercial partnership Concrete Work Ltd, for which reasonthese companies should be called into the proceedings.
(2) That without prejudice to the above and on the merit the applicant’s demands shouldbe rejected with costs since:
(i) From nowhere does there result any lease agreement which gives rise to the payment claimed and furthermore;
(ii) On the basis of para six (6) of the writing of the 23rd January, 1989 the applicant had accepted and bound himself to hold the same machinery without any pretension or reservation for payment of compensation and thus in default of such agreement, no amount can be due to the lack of the elements required by law in regard to the same.
Saving other exceptions.
That in virtue of a judgement of the Honourable Civil Court First Hall, of the 28th May, 2013 in the names premised it upheld the demands of the respondent applicants.
That the interpellant appellant felt aggrieved by the said judgement and is humbly filing an appeal therefrom.
That the facts which gave rise to this cause are in brief the following:
That by means of a private writing which bears the date of the 23rd January, 1989 the interpellant appellant bought and acquired various machinery from the respondent which machinery were and still are the property of tal-Barrani Co. Ltd and registered in the name of the commercial partnership Concrete Works Ltd.
That when the interpellant went to collect this machinery he found that they were not of the quality agreed and objected to pay with the consequence that the respondent filed procedures for payment of the bill of exchange representing the price by means of procedures number 747/89, and on the other hand the interpellant appellant had filed procedures to neutralise the same bill of exchange by means of writ of summons number 1195/90.
That the said procedures were both concludedin favour of the respondent.
That by means of a private writing of the 1st October, 2010 the parties had concluded once and for all any pendencies resulting from the said legal procedures.
That although it is the case that the interpellant respondenthad not collectedthe machinery merit of these procedures till the date of the 1st October, 2010 and till this daythe least one expected is that the respondent file the present procedures.
That the grievances are clear and consist in the following:
(1) That the Honourable Court of First Instance with due respect could never uphold the first demand ‘in toto’.
That the first demand of the respondent reads:
(1) Whilst finding the respondent responsible for the damages caused to the applicant resulting from the facts declared in this application consisting amongst others in: (i) legal expenses, (ii) transport expenses; and (iii) damages for the occupation of the property of the interpellant, liquidate the damages mentioned and condemn the respondent to pay them with interests till the date of effective payment.
That from the totality of the proof it results that:
(1) The plaintiff confirmed that he was not asking for compensation for the occupation of his land.
(2) That the plaintiff removed the machineryin property of a company which he had together with his brother Luboil Manufacturers Co Ltd.
(3) That the company accepted in agreement with the respondent appellantto hold the indicated machinery in its property by leasing the space at the rate of €23.29 daily in the amount of €17,001.70.
(4) That a Warrant of Prohibitory Injunction which cost €64 had been issued.
That from these facts as summarised by the Court of First Instance it results that:
(a) the place were allegedly these vehicles were taken is not the property of the respondent appellant.
In his first demand the respondent appellant emphasises that he wants compensationto make good for the damages caused to him as a consequence of the occupation of his property by the interpellant.
With all respect it results well from the evidence of the same applicant appellant, as well as from the evidence given by Michael Fenech, that the place where these vehicles were taken to belongs to the commercial partnership Luboil Manufacturers Co Ltdand not the respondent appellant.
That thus the respondent appellant, can never ask for the payment of damages caused to him for the occupation of his property since: (a) the property where they were taken to is not his and the demand as made in his own name and not in the name of the company Luboil.
.................omissis.................
That thus it is respectfully submitted that the observation of the Honourable Court of First Instance that: It is the casethat where the plaintiff put those trucks belongs to his brother and the plaintiff himself, but as statednobody does anything for nothing and the presumption is that the service a person gives to another is given with the intention of compensation is an observation which overrides every legal principlewhich gives every company, a distinct juridical personality and this in line with thatjust submitted further up.
That thus this demand should have been rejected.
(b) That as regards the damages claimed regarding the demand for the issuing of a Warrant of Prohibitory Injunction with all respect, the respondent appellant did not show anywhere what the outcome of this demand was.
It is respectfully submitted that this demand was never concluded and the Court never decreed the same warrant which is still pending till this day and this simply because the respondent appellant never abided by the Court’s requirements.
(2) That furthermoreit doesnot result that between the partiesthere was an agreement in virtue of which the interpellant appellant bound himself to make good for any expenses incurred by the respondent, as regards the storage or lease of the vehicles indicated.
(i) That the writing of 1989 is clear and detailed and from nowhere does it result that the interpellant appellant had to make good for any payments resulting from the fact that the respondent held the said vehicles.
That with due respect, although the Court of First Instance, directly avoidedthis version indirectly, it is upholding it so much so that it basedthe justificationof its decision on letters directed to the interpellant appellant.
................omissis...........
That with due respect it is submitted also that there is a clear contradiction in that expressed by the Honourable Court of First Instance.
In the first place it pronounced itself that nobody does anything for nothing and that whoever gives a service is to get paid for it, at the same time it is accepting that clause six (6) above indicated does not refer to the fact whether rent is to be paid or not but it refers only as to whom the risk passes.
With all respect, for which reason the respondent, chose not to demand any compensation for the period 1989 to 2009, when the principle established is that nobodygives a service for nothing.
Not because it was obvious due to the agreement between the parties and this was accepted by the same respondent appellant, that the storage was the responsibility of the respondent appellantand that the risk was for the respondent and this till the relative transfers were made.
That thus in the humble submission of the interpellant, the Honourable Court of First Instance interpreted clause six incorrectly and outside the spirit of the same agreement.
(ii) That also and with respect the Honourable Court of First Instance totally ignored the writing of the 1st October, 2010.
That this writing had to close once and for all any pendency resulting from the lawsuits 747/89 and 1195/1990.
That thus if from this writingwhich is the last writing signed between the parties as regards any pendency resulting from the writing of the 23rd January, 1989 it does not result that the interpellant appellant had to pay the respondent appellantsome form of damages as pretended by him, how could the Honourable Court of First Instance, condemn the interpellant appellant for the payment of damages allegedly resulting before the 1st October 2010?
Thatwith due respect how can it be accepted that after the parties met, discussed and settled all the pendencies regarding that resulting from these two lawsuits, the respondent pretends to ignore completely and to make demands which were extinguished?
It is respectfully submitted for some unknown reason by the the interpellant the Honourable Court of First Instance did not take cognizance of this writing since it is the humble opinion of the interpellant appellant that if it had taken cognizance of it it would have reached a different conclusion.
Thus the interpellant appelant whilst referring to the proof produced and reserving to bring forwardall the other proof permittedto him by law, prays with respect that this Honourable Court revokes and cancels the judgement appealed and this by upholding the grievances of the interpellant and reject the demands of the respondent appellant, with costs of both instances against the same respondent.
Notify: Michael Angelo Fenech, 1, Marina Alley, No 3, Kalkara.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LL.D.
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1955
1955By a decree given by the Civil Court First Hall on the 26th November, 2013 on the application of Falzon Mary of Tuesday, 28th January, 2014 at noon (12.00 p.m.) in the morning has been fixed for the Sale by Auctionto be held on the first floor of these Courts of Justice, Republic Street, Valletta, of the following property:
The tenement number 26, ‘Geomar’, Triq is-Sewwieqa, Ħamrun, free and unencumbered, and with all rights and enjoyments, valued at two hundred and nine thousand six hundred and forty three euro and sixty one cents (€209,643.61).
The said tenement is the property of Falzon George (ID 434254 M) and Falzon Mary (ID 138055M).
N.B. The said tenement will be sold as described in the acts of the file number 21/13.
Marvic Farrugia
For the Registrar Civil Court and Tribunal
Notice 1956
1956By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 22nd November, 2013 Application number 1139/2013, by Pierre and Michelle, brother and sister Borg, whereby they prayed that it be declared open in their favour in the quota of one half (1/2) undivided share between them the succession oftheir father Charles Borg,legally separated, son of the late Peter Borg and Catherine née Caruana, born in Imtarfa, resided in Żurrieq, and died in Tal-Qroqq, limits of Imsida, on the 16th May, 2013 aged 57, intestate, holding Identity Card number 586155(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 1957
1957By a decree given on the 11th November, 2013 by the Civil Court First Hall, the Court ordered that the extract hereunder mentioned be published for the purpose of service according to Article 187 (3) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).
Notice
In the First Hall of the Civil Court
In the records of Judicial Sale by Auction number
29/2008 in the names:
Sciberras Carmelo vs Mifsud Catherine
Honourable Mr Justice Dr Jacqueline Padovani Grima LL.D.
The Court,
Following the adjudication of Thursday, 22nd March, 2011 in favour of Glenn Borg for the price of €57,000 for the hereunder mentioned tenement belonging to Catherine Mifsud mentioned in the same Judicial Acts namely:
Flat internally marked with number one (1), forming part of an unnumbered block of flats, named ‘Mercury Flats’, in Saint Venera Street, Msida, free and unencumbered, with all its rights and appurtenances, valued at €98,000.
Whereas instatutory time given by law Borg Glenn (ID 281675M) has not deposited the bid in the amount of €57,000 for the property mentioned above.
Seen the application of the HSBC Bank Malta p.l.c. of the 18th December, 2012.
The Court therefore decrees and appoints Tuesday, 21st January,2014fromnine(9.00 a.m.) totwelvenoon (12.00 p.m.), for the final Sale by Auction and Adjudication of the afore mentioned property which Sale is to be held on the first floor of these Courts of Justice, Republic Street, Valletta.
The Court hereby orders that a copy of this decree be served on the execution creditor, the execution debtor, the purchaser and the last bidder.
Marvic Farrugia
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1958
1958By a decree given by the Civil Court First Hall on the 16th October, 2013 on the application of Bank of Valletta p.l.c. of Tuesday, 14th January, 2014 from nine (9.00 a.m.) to noon (12.00 p.m.), has been fixed for the Sale by Auctionto be held on the first floor of these Courts of Justice, Republic Street, Valletta, of the following properties:
1. The temporary utile dominium for the remaining period from 150 years commencing on December 1933 of tenements numbered 21 and 27 in Żimelli Street, Ħamrun, including a back yard accessible form both tenements, as being subject to the annual and temporary groundrent together valued €260,890.
2. The temporary utile dominium for the remaining period from 150 years commencing on December 1933 of tenement numbered 23 in Żimelli Street, Ħamrun, as being subject to the annual and temporary groundrent together valued €111,810.
3. Tenement numbered 68, in Żimelli Street, Ħamrun, valued at €67,552.
4. Garage unofficially marked 1, Pioneer Road, St. Paul’s Bay, underlying flat internally marked 1, forming part of a block of flats known as Howard Building Block A, valued at €158,397.
5. Ground floor garage accessible from Paul Schembri Street, Ħal Tarxien, and underlying garage situated in basement level from Triq ix-Xintill, Ħal Tarxien together valued at €97,834.
The said property belongs to Mexico Garage Rent-A-Car Company Limited (C5002).
N.B. The said tenements will be sold as described in the acts of the file number 165/04.
N.B. The property sold in this auction will be adjudicated for any offer.
Marvic Farrugia
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1959
1959By a decree given on the 28th November, 2013 by the Civil Court First Hall, the Court ordered that the extract hereunder mentioned be published for the purpose of service according to Article 187 (3) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).
By a decree of the 7th October, 2013 given by the First Hall Civil Court, the Court ordered that the extract hereunder mentioned be published for the purpose of service according to Article 338 (1) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).
That by application and a Schedule of set-off filed contemporaneously by Focal Maritime Co. Ltd on the 1st October, 2013 the approval of the said judicial acts is being demanded for the amount of €3,000 following judicial sale by auction 32/12 in the names Focal Maritime Co. Ltd vs Top Hat Co. Ltd, held under the Authority of the said Court on the 30th September, 2013.
According to Article 338 (2) of Chapter 12: Any person who may have an interest and the persons so served shall be allowed the time of twenty days to file an answer stating in detail the reasons for their opposition and the amounts in contestation, and where such opposition is based on a claim against the proceeds of sale and alleged cause of preference, they are to state the amount of such claim and the basis for the preference. Such persons shall with the answer file all relevant evidence to substantiate their opposition.
BRUNO ZAHRA
For The Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1960
1960By means of a decree given on the 22nd October, 2013 in the records of the judicial letter number 2777/13, in the names Doctor of Laws Dr Paul Edgar Micallef noevs Sesco Investments Ltd, the First Hall of the Civil Courtordered thefollowingpublicationin terms of Article 187 (5) of Cap. 12 for the purpose of effecting service.
By means of a judicial letter filed in the First Hall of the Civil Court against Sesco Investments Ltd (C 19850) of 34, South Street, Valletta,on the 16th September, 2013 Doctor of Laws Dr Paul Edgar Micallef for and on behalf of the Malta Communications Authority, of Valletta Waterfront, Pinto Wharf, Floriana FN1913, notifies you with the attached sworn declaration as Doc A, for all the purposes and effects of Article 49 of the Malta Communications Authority Act, Cap. 418 of the Laws of Malta solicits you so that you pay the sum of €19,360.51, due as administrative payments for the general authorisation granted to Sesco Investments Ltd in terms of the Electronic Communication Networks and Services (General) Regulations, S.L. 399.28, payments of fines and payments of interest as results from the invoice here attached and marked as Doc B.
This judicial letter is being made for the purpose of interrupting prescription according to Title XXV of the Civil Code, Cap. 16 of the Laws of Malta.
With costs including those of this judicial letter.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1961
1961By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 15th November, 2013 Application number 1113/2013, by Giovanna Debono whereby she prayed that it be declared open in favour ofMaria Camilleri, Emily Falzon, Verginia Debono, Lucy Caruana, Arthur, Giovanna and Joseph, brothers and sisters Borg, and this in the quota of one eighth (1/8) undivided part each one of them, in favour ofCarmelo, Joseph, Maria Scibilia, John, Anna O’Meara, Grace Mary Nally and Maria Theresa Wallace, children of the late Carmelo Borg,the later brother of the decujus, and this in the quota of one part of sixty four (1/64) undivided share each one of them, and in favour ofSimon, Chris and Mark, brothers Borg, children of the late Anthony Borg, and this in the quota of one part of one hundred and ninety two (1/192) undivided share each one of them the succession ofTeresa Borg, unmarried, daughter of the late Antonio Borg and Giuseppa née Sultana, born and resided in Imsida,and died in Tal-Qroqq, limits of Imsida, on the 29th August, 2013 aged 84, intestate, holding Identity Card number 292029(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 1962
1962By means of a decree of the 17th October, 2013 the Court of Magistrates (Malta) ordered the publication of the following extract for the purpose of effecting service in terms of Article 187 (3) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).
By means of Garnishee Order Number 3421/06 in the names Aaron and Michelle, spouses Galea, (ID 472880M and ID204181M) vs Charles and Doris spouses Vella (ID 116065M and ID 466062M), filed on the 28th December, 2006 by Aaron and Michelle, spouses Galea, whereby this Honourable Court ordered the issue of a Garnishee Order to be executed on the garnishee or garnishees as hereinafter mentioned against the debtors for the debt herein mentioned and for the costs of this procedure, in execution of the debt hereinafter indicated:
Debt:Sum €11,646.87 (LM5,000)
Interest €540.65 (Lm232.10)
Costs €264.76 (Lm113.66)
Executive Title:Judicial letter in terms of Art. 166A, numbered 2066/06 in the names above mentioned dated 30th March, 2006 and rendered as an executive title.
Creditor:63, Triq ir-Ramla Żejtun.
Debtors:Melvell, 53, Triq il-Familja Cumbo, Mosta.
Garnishees:HSBC Bank Malta plc
Bank of Valletta Malta Ltd
Lombard Bank Malta plc
APS Bank Ltd
By means of an application of the spouses Vella, they respectfully submitted that:
The applicant works with the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure in Marsa.That they have the said garnishee order issued against them.
That the salary of the applicant is €992 (Net), and accordingly he is respectfully filing this application so that from these, the sum of €700 which is protected by law is passed on to the applicants, who are also the parents of three minor children who still live at the residence of the applicants.
Accordingly, the applicants respectfully request this Honourable Court to allow the applicants to withdraw the sum of €700 every month from their salary in such a manner that the balance is then passed on to the aforementioned creditors.
Notification:4, Polmar, Triq Santa Tereża, Ħaż-Żabbar.
In the Courts of Magistrates (Malta)
Magistrate Dr Giovanni Grixti B.A. LL.D.
In the records of Garnishee Order Number 3421/06
Aaron Galea et vs Charles Vella et
The Court,
Having seen the application
Orders the service of the said applicant to the creditors spouses Galea and the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure so that a confirmation of the employment of the debtor and the salary which he earns is confirmed, and this confirmation is to be made within 2 days from today.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1963
1963By means of a decree given by the First Hall Civil Court, on the 21st November, 2013 in the records of the Counter Warrant of Seizure Number 412/2012, following the Warrant of Seizure number 1378/2006, Paul Micallef pro et noe vs Paolo Soldi pro et noe, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent Paul Micallef, in terms of Article 187 (3) et seq. of Cap. 12.
By means of an Application filed in the First Hall Civil Court, in the records of the Counter Warrant of Seizure Number412/2012, following the Warrant of Seizure Number 1378/2006, Paul Micallef pro et noe vs Paolo Soldi pro et noe, on the 23rd October, 2013 the applicant Paolo Soldi(Italian Passport Number 054950R) pro et noe, respectfully ordered:
That by means of a Warrant of Seizure number 1379/2006, it was ordered that the Seizure of the Van Isużu with registration number KBH 798, and this tillthependency between the parties which was the merit of the cause Paul Micallef pro et noe vs Paolo Soldi pro et noe(Writ of Summons Number 837/2006) is resolved. That this van Isuzu was deposited with a certain Mark Attard, or rather the owner of Mark’s Garage, il-Ħandaq, Ħal Qormi,and this till the pendency is resolved.
That the cause above mentioned was decided by this Honourable Civil Court First Hall, presided by Judge Raymond C. Pace, on the 29th February, 2012 whereby it was decided that the plaintiff’s demands were unfounded in fact and at law, and thus they had all to be rejected and as a consequence the please of the defendant today applicant were rejected.
That this cause was appealed, and thus today it isresjudicata.
That thus the seizure was no longer in force once the claim which was being secured in virtue of it was declared unfounded in fact and at law by means of the judgement above mentioned.
That infact on the 28th March, 2012 the applicant demanded and obtained the issuing of a counter warrantfor the reasons above mentioned, and on the 20th March, 2012 Mark Attard who was appointed as consegnetary for the van so seized was notified with the same counter warrant.
That despite of this Mark Attard is still refuting the release of the van Isuzu in dispute and this abusively and illegally once the judgement in question was decided in favour of the same applicant.
That this is causing damages to the applicant and this as with the passage of time, the van in question is losing its priceand is suffering various damages due to its lack of use.
That the applicant has every right to be restored in the possession of the van in question once it is declared by the Honourable First Hall Civil Court, that the rights being secured by the warrant of seizure in questionare unfounded both in fact and at law. That if Mark Attard has any claimsdue to the fact that he was a depositary of the van in questionhe has to use the judicial means stipulated at law against Paul Micallef and not deprive the applicant from the enjoyment of his property, and take the law in his own hands.
Thus the applicant is demanding that this Honourable Court so that:
(i) it orders within the term established by this Court, Mark Attard to put the applicant in possession of the Van Isuzu KBH 798 which was seized by means of the warrant of seizure number 1378/2006, which warrant is no longer in force;
(ii) in case this is not done, give the necessary orders so that theapplicant take back possessionof the said vehicle, including the forced entry of the place where the vehicle is being held with the assistance of the marshalls and the Executive Police if it be the case, and this under those orders that this Honourable Court deems fit to impose in the circumstances.
Civil Court First Hall.
Hon. Mr. Justice Joseph. R. Micallef L.L.D.
In the records of the Counter Warrant number 412/2012 in the names:
Paul Micallef pro et noe vs Paolo Soldi pro et noe.
The Court
Having seen the Application
Orders that whoever is interested be notifiedand is to file a reply within four (4) working days.
Service: 30, Triq it-Torri, San Ġwann.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LL.D.
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1964
1964By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 27th November, 2013 Application number 1149/2013, by Bethany Cauchi, Jasmine Pauline Rita Camilleri, Karl Grech and Domenica Grech whereby they prayed that it be declared open in favour ofBethany Cauchi, Jasmine Pauline Rita Camilleri, Karl Grech and Domenica Grech, and this in equal shares between them the succession oftheir mother Mary Grech, legally separated, daughter of the late Spiridione Grech and Maria Dolores née Brincat, born in Pietà and resided in Birżebbuġa, and died in Tal-Qroqq, limits of Imsida, on the 27th March, 2011 aged 59, intestate, holding Identity Card number 220552(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 1965
1965By decree given by the Civil Court First Hall on the 28th November, 2013 on the application of Sammut Paul et,of Tuesday, 21st January, 2014 at eleven (11.00 a.m.), has been fixed for the Sale by Auction to be held in the first floor of these Courts of Justice, Republic Street, Valletta of the following property:
The tenement numbered two (2), alley number two (2), in Triq San Katald, Rabat, free and unencumbered, valued at six thousand nine hundred and eighty eight euro and twelve cents (€6,988.12).
The temporary direct dominju of the remaining period from the 10th November, 1995 of €163.06 (Lm70) yearly of the tenement numbered thirty eight (38), Triq Doni, Rabat, valued at twenty three thousand two hundred and ninety three euro and seventy three cents (€23,293.73).
The temporary direct dominju of the remaining period around four years of the tenement numbered three (3), alley numbered one (1), Triq San Franġisk, Rabat, valued at six thousand nine hundred and eighty eight euro and twelve cents (€6,988.12).
The said tenement is the property of Teresa Gauci and Josephine Baldacchino.
N.B. The said tenement will be sold as described in the acts of the file number 51/13.
Bruno Zahra
For the Registrar of Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1966
1966By means of an application filed in the Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 27th November, 2013 Application number 1151/2013, by Maria Dolores Bianchi whereby she prayed that it be declared open infavour of the same Maria Dolores Bianchi, wife of the decujus, and this in the quota of one half (1/2) undivided share, and in favour of Octavia Tabone Bianchi, Rose Belle Bianchi and Donatella Schembri Bianchi, children of the decujus, and this in the quota of one sixth (1/6) undivided share each one of themthe succession ofGeorge Bianchi, husband of the same Maria Dolores Bianchi, children of the late Vincent Bianchi and Venera née Cardona, born and resided in Ħal Qormi, and died in Rabat, Gozo, on the 19th July, 2013 aged 68, intestate, holding Identity Card number 64745(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 1967
1967By means of a decree of the 17th June, 2013 of the Civil Court First Hall, in the records of judicial letter number 1369/13, in the names Director General (Value AddedTax)vs Grange Security & Consultancy Services Limited et,the following publication for the purpose of service of the respondents was ordered in terms of Article 187 (3) et seq. of Cap. 12.
In the First Hall of the Civil Court
To:
1.Grange Security & Consultancy Services Limited (C30472), of 8 Triq Ġużè Orlando, Mrieħel, Birkirkara;
2.Joseph Grange (KI 286962M) of 35, The Grange, Triq il-Port Ruman, Marsaxlokk.
By the present, the Director General (Value Added Tax) of Centre Point Building, Ta’ Paris Road, Birkirkara, calls upon you in terms of Articles 59 and 66 of Act XXIII of 1998, so that within two (2) days from the service of this act, you pay the amount of €394,964.58 representing amount due by you according to the same Act.
With costs and interest according to the said Act till the date of effective payment.
This calling is being made for all intents and purposes of law and particularly, but not exclusively, in order to render executive title which the same Director General (Value Added Tax) has against you by means of a notice sent to you for payment.
In default the interpellant warns you that he shall pass to execute the said executive title he has against you by means of the opportune warrants.
So much so that you may know how to regulate yourself and to proceed.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1968
1968By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 21st November, 2013 Application number 1130/2013, by Joseph Camilleri, Carmel Galea, Maria Dolores Galea, Joseph Camilleri, Paul Camilleri, Dorothy Leone Ganado, Rita Farrugia, Filippa, sive Phyllis Catania, Anna Maria Grech, Mario Camilleri and Reginald Camilleri, whereby they prayed that it be declared open in their favour in shares according to law the succession ofRev. Luigi Camilleri, bachelor, son of the late Salvatore Camilleri and Madalena née Bonnici, born and resided in Naxxar, and died at Tal-Qroqq, limits of Imsida, on the 1st September, 2013 aged 90, intestate, holding Identity Card number 713522(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 1969
1969By means of a decree given on the 15th October, 2013 in the records of the judicial letter number 2419/12, in the names Director Corporate Services in the Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and Communication vs Cuschieri Richard John Charles, the Courts of Magistrates (Malta) ordered the following publication for the purpose of service, in terms of Article 187 (3) of Cap. 12.
By means of a judicial letter filed in the Court of Magistrates (Malta) against Cuschieri Richard John Charles (ID 481789M) of Shanrich Garage, Triq il-Maġġur Anthony Aquilina, Birkirkara,on the 14th September, 2012 Director Corporate Services in the Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and Communication, of 120, Strait Street, Valletta, and/or Millenia, Floor 1, Aldo Moro Road, Marsa, forthe purposes of Article 466 of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure notifies you with the attached sworn declaration Dok A, and calls upon you so that within two days you pay the sum of €627.67 due by you as license arrears WT/4655/2003, which license lapsed on the 30th November, 2004 as shown in the attached document marked Doc B.
If you fail to pay or make opposition on your part as per Article 466, the interpellant shall request the issue of executive warrants against you according to law.
Pay also the costs of this act.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Bann for Curators
1970Republic of Malta
To the Court Marshall
By means of a decree given by this Court, on the 22nd November, 2013 following a request of DVB Bank SE,it was ordered that deputy curators be chosen to represent the company ‘Shokooh Sagar Kish Shipping Co.’, in the records of the judicial letter in the names DVB Bank SE vs Isim Amin Limited et, and in the relative and subsequent acts.
By means of a judicial letter in the First Hall Civil Court, on the 18th November, 2013, to:
(i) Isim Amin Limited (C 40069);
(ii) Deputy Curators to represent the foreign company ‘Shokooh Sagar KishShipping Co.’, a company registered in the Islamic Republic of Iran, DVB Bank SE, a foreign Bank set up in Germany with official number HRB 83980, as represented locally by its special mandatary Advocate Paul Micallef Grimaud (ID 67579M), asduly authorised, whilst referring to the judicial letter which was presented in the Registry of this Honourable Court on the 3rd April, 2012 and duly notified to ‘Isim Amin Limited’, in virtue of which Mortgage dated 20th November, 2009 which was enrolled in the registry of the vessel M.V. Amin in Malta, was rendered executable in virtue of Article 253 et seq.(Cap. 12 of the Laws of Malta) and Article 42 of Cap. 234 of the Laws of Malta, and whilst referring also to the pacts stipulated in the Deed of Covenants, dated 20th November, 2009 made between theinterpellant Bank and Isim Amin Limitedas owner of the vessel M.V. Amin, and in virtue of whichthe respondent ‘Isim Amin Limited’ bound itself ‘inter alia’not to sell or assign in any mannerthe said vessel M.V. Amin, and in virtueof which it permitsthe same vessel to be registeredin another register with an alternativeflag, without the consent of the interpellant Bank, calls upon you for all intents and purposes of law that any sale and transfer made by ‘Isim Amin Limited’ to third parties without the consent of the interpellant Bank is null and without effect according to law.
That in view of the premised and in view of that which has recently come to the notice of the interpellant Bank, it appears that the vessel M.V. Amin appears to be presently registered with the name ‘AMIN 2’ in the property of the respondentcompany ‘Shokooh Sagarkish Shipping Co.’, the interpellant Bank for all intents and purposes of law calls upon you so that any transfermade by ‘Isim AminLimited’ to third parties was made illicitly and without the express consent of the interpellant Bank.
……omissis……
That the interpellant Bank above all fully reserves all its rights resulting from the said registered mortgageand burdening the said vessel ‘AMIN’, and notifies you that it intends to proceed further against you according to law.
So much so that you may know how to proceed.
Notify: Amin Limited: GM International Services Limited, 147/1, Santa Luċia Street, Valletta.
Deputy Curators: Courts of Justice, 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 Silvio Meli, LL.D. Doctor of Laws.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LL.D.
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1971
1971By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 22nd October, 2013 Application number 1030/2013, by James Deguara and Mario Deguara, whereby they prayed that it be declared open in their favour in equal shares between them the succession ofMaria Dolores Deguara, widow of James Deguara, daughter of the late Nazzareno Farrugia and Angela née Frendo, born in Ħaż-Żebbug, resided in Mosta, and died in San Ġiljan, on the 19th June 2013, aged 73, intestate, holding Identity Card number 242940(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 1972
1972By a decree of the Court of Magistrates (Malta), of the 5th June, 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).
MarsovinLimited (C 115) of The Winery, Wills Street, Paola,filed a Claim on the 31st January, 2013 whereby they asked the Court to condemn Alessandro Bianchi (ID 450865M), of Melita Mansions, Flat 15, Triq il-Knisja, Sliema, to pay the plaintiff company the sum of €9,439 which amount is due to the plaintiff company.
With costs andinterests.
The case (Notice Number 28/13CSH) is put off to the 8th January, 2014 at 9.00 a.m.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1973
1973By means of a decree given by the First Hall Civil Court, on the 3rd December, 2013 in the records ofthe Sworn Application, in the names Abraham k/a Brian Attard vs Philip Parsons, application number 935/13 AF, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the defendant in terms of Article 187 (3) et seq. of Cap. 12.
By means of an Application filed in the First Hall Civil Court, in the records of the Sworn Application, Abraham k/a Brian Attard (ID 283463M) vs Philip Parsons, on the 1st October, 2013 the applicant Brian Attard respectfully pleaded:
That he is the owner of the property or rather maisonette at groundfloor level with the name ‘Giżimina’, Block 2, Gloria Maris, in Triq l-Iskal, Marsaskala, which property includes a front garden and back yard that the respondent is the owner of appartment number 1, in the same block overlying the property of the applicant. That for the reasons premised in the application, the respondent is to state why this Honourable Court should not:
Declare that by his air-conditioning units the respondent is occupying the airspace of the applicant without any authorisation and thus abusively and illegally, order the respondent to reintegrate the applicant in the possessionof his proprietary rights by removing the same air-conditioning units and uphold the other demands in the application.
With costs and saving any further action due to the applicant against the respondent from now summoned so that a reference to his evidence be made.
Applicant: Delfina, Triq il-Katakombi, Ta’ Bistra, Mosta.
Respondent: Gloria Maris, Block 2, Flat 1, Triq l-Iskal, Marsaskala.
The Sworn Application in the names Abraham k/a/ Brian Attard vs Philip Parsons, application number 935/13 AF, has been putoffforhearingtothe16thJanuary, 2014 at 9.00 a.m.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LL.D.
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals