Go Back
Court Notices published in Govt. Gazette No. 19,235 of 11th April 2014
01/01/2014
Notice 576
576By means of a decree given on the 18th April, 2013 by the Rent Regulation Board, in the records of the Sworn Application, in the names David Scerri vs Maureen Scicluna, application number 123/13 GG, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent in terms of Article 187 (3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.
By means of a Sworn Application filed in the Rent Regulation Board, in the names David Scerri (ID 138952M) vs Maureen Scicluna (ID 388981M), on the 10th December, 2013 the applicant David Scerri asked this Honourable Board saving any necessary declaration:
To decide the cause without proceeding to a hearing in terms of Article 16A of Cap. 69 of the Laws of Malta, saving a declaration that the respondent defaulted in her obligations according to the lease agreement premised dated 18th February, 1974 by failing to pay the rent due regarding the lease of Flat 3, which forms part of the block with the name Pilkington Flats, Triq San Girgor, Sliema, condemn the respondent so that within a short and peremptory periodshe vacates from the premises Flat 3, Pilkington Flats, Triq San Girgor, Sliema, and uphold the other demands in the application.
With costs ...omissis... against the respondent summoned so that a reference to her evidence be made, and saving any other action due to the applicants.
Applicant: Flat 1, Pilkington Flats, St Gregory Street, Sliema.
Respondent: Flat 3, Pilkington Flats, St Gregory Street, Sliema.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LL.D.
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 577
577By means of a decree of the 25th March, 2014 in the First Hall of the Civil Courtsin the records of the judicial letter number 490/14 in the names Bank of Valletta plc vsMaray & Grant Limited,ordered the following publication for the purpose of service in terms of Article 187 (5) of Cap. 12.
By means of a judicial letter filed in the First Hall of the Civil Courts against Maray & Grant Limited (C 3988), of16, Raymen, Triq is-Siġġiewi, Żebbuġ, on the 17th February, 2014 Bank of Valletta plc of1/5, Misraħ San Ġorg, Valletta VLT 1190,calls upon you so that within two days you paythe sum of €1,693,373.87 balance of debt in your Loan Accounts with Bank of Valletta plctogetherwith further interests from the 3rd October, 2011 till the date ofeffective payment.
This calling is being made for all intents and purposes of law, and particularly but not exclusively, in order to render executivable the contract of costitution of debt in the acts of Notary Dottor Rachel Mallia, dated 3rd October, 2011 where you constituted yourself certain, liquid, and true debtor in the sum of €1,693,373.87 together with further interest from the 3rd October, 2011 till the date of effective payment.
The interpellant company warns you that if you fail, they shall be constrained to proceed against you according to law.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 578
578By means of a decree of the 25th March, 2014 in the First Hall of the Civil Courtsin the records of the judicial letter number 489/14 in the names Bank of Valletta plc vsGraziella Buhagiar,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 First Hall of the Civil Courts against Graziella Buhagiar (ID 63988M), of16, Raymen, Triq is-Siġġiewi, Żebbuġ, on the 17th February, 2014 Bank of Valletta plc of1/5, Misraħ San Ġorg, Valletta VLT 1190,whilst refering to the contract dated 3rd October, 2011 in the acts of Notary Doctor Rachel Mallia, where youguaranteed together and in solidum with Maray & Grant Limited, the debts of the same Maray & Grant Limited,calls upon you so that within two days together and in solidum you pay the sum of €1,693,373.87 balance of debt in the Loan Accounts of Maray & Grant Limitedwith Bank of Valletta plc together with further interests from the 3rd October, 2011 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 executivable the contract of costitution of debt in the acts of Notary Doctor Rachel Mallia, dated 3rd October, 2011 where you constituted yourself certain, liquid, and true debtor in the sum of €1,693,373.87 together with further interest from the 3rd October, 2011 till the date of effective payment.
The interpellant company warns you that if you fail, they shall be constrained to proceed against you according to law.
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 579
579By means of a decree given on the 25th March, 2014 by the Rent Regulation Board, in the records of the Sworn Application in the names Olive Bohner vs Joseph and Monica, spouses Debono, application in terms of Article 1548A of the Civil Code, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondents in terms of Article 187 (3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.
By means of an Application filed in the Rent Regulation Board, in the names Olive Bohner vs Joseph Debono et, on the 5th February, 2014 the applicant Olive Bohner (ID 126641M) asked this Honourable Boardsaving the summary hearing of the parties if necessary:
(1) to fix the alternative days and times so that the applicants together with Architect Ian Turban, appointed by her,inspect the premises 238, Triq Sant’ Elena, Sliema, as provided by Article 1548A of the Civil Code.
(2) order that this inspection be made under the supervision and in the presence of a Court Marshall, and this saving any other provision it deems fit and opportune.
With costs against the respondents so that a reference to their evidence be made.
Applicant: Flat 20, GT Court B, Triq il-Villeġġjatura, St Paul’s Bay.
Service: 238, Triq Sant’ Elena, Sliema.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LL.D.
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 580
580By means of a decree given on the 20th March,2014 by the Court of Appeal (Superior Jurisdiction), in the records of the Appeal Application, in the names John Ellul vs Maria Parnis et, application number 406/12 FS, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent Assuero Ellulin terms of Article 187(3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.
By means of an Appeal Application filed in the Court of Appeal,Writ of Summons Number 406/12 FS, John Ellul vs Maria Parnis, Victoria Agius and Assuero Ellul, on the 27th January, 2014 the applicant John Ellul (ID 348256M), humbly pleaded:
A. Preliminary.
1. That by means of a Sworn Application, the applicant premisedthat the parties are the only children of the deceased Assuero Ellul, who died on the 29th March, 1998 and this as results from the relative Act of Death, that in virtue of his last revocatory will dated 2nd February, 1998 in the records of Notary Joseph Raphael Darmanin, the deceased Assuero Ellul disposed of his hereditary assets by whilst appointing as his universal heirs the respondents his children in equal shares between them,he left variousprelegacies to the same respondents, and left the legitimin favour of the plaintiff, that in virtue of his said will, the deceased Assuero Ellul declared that during his lifehe transferred by gratuitoustitle in favour of the plaintiff two lorries used for transporting stones, which together with all the other property which the testator allegedly passed to the plaintiff, are to be imputed to the legitim due the plaintiff according to law, that the plaintiffdenies thatthe deceased his fatherever passed any property to him during his life.
...........omissis...........
That the respondents are failing to pay the plaintiff the portion due to him from the hereditary assets of his deceased father Assuero Ellul, and this despite that the respondents Maria Parnis, Victoria Agius, were called to do this despite of a judicial letter sent to them, on the 28th March, 2008 whilst the respondent Assuero Ellul had bound himselfto do such payment by means of a private writing signed between himself and the plaintiff on the 4th June, 1999 in the presence of Notary Dr Daniel Caruana, as witness of the signatures of the contracting parties.
2. That the applicant thus asked the Court to liquidate the hereditary estate of the deceased father of the parties Assuero Ellul,and consequentlyliquidate the legitim or rather the reserved portion to the applicants from the hereditary estate of the deceased father Assuero Ellul.
...........omissis...........
3. That in virtue of the his sworn reply, Assuero Ellul pleaded that the demandfor the reserved portion has lapsed by the passage of the ten year period from the date of the death of Assuero Ellul.
...........omissis...........
4. That during the proceedings, the applicant reached a compromise with the respondents Maria Parnis and Victoria Agius, and by means of a note presented on the 9th August, 2013 the applicant ceded his claims brought forward against the respondents Maria Parnis and Victoria Agius, and the proceedings in their regard following a compromise, and held steadfast his claims against the respondent Assuero Ellul.
5.That in virtue of a judgement of the First Hall Civil Court, given on the 14th January, 2014 the Court decided by declaringthat thereonly remainedthat it pronounce itself regarding the applicant’s demand in regard to the respondent Assuero Ellul.
6. That the applicant appellant felt aggrieved by the judgement of the Court of First Instance, and is filing this humble appeal regarding the conclusion of the Court of First Instanceas regards the demand vis-à-vis the respondent Assuero Ellul is prescribed.
B. The Grievances.
Nullity of the Judgement Appealed.
7. That the Court of First Instance declared that the demand of the applicant as regards the respondent Assuero Ellul is prescribed by retaining that the agreement of the 4th June, 1999 once it was not registered as providedby Act Number XV11 of 1993 (Cap. 364),and the Regulations made there under the Court considered that this agreement was no longer valid.
8. That in the first place, the applicant feels aggrieved by the fact that the Court of First Instance passed on to raise this question regarding the registration of the agreement marte proprio, a matter which was raised by the Court of First Instance in the judgement only on the basis of which the Court of First Instance passed on to reject the applicant’s demand.
9. The applicant contends that this type of plea could not have been raised by the Court of First Instance ex officio.
...........omissis...........
10. The Court of First Instance did the same when it considered the plea raised by the respondent in terms of Article 845 of Cap. 16.
...........omissis...........
11. That thus in the light of this, once the respondent failed to indicate the Article on which he was basing his plea of prescription, this plea had to be declared inadmissible.
12.That furthermore the applicant contends that the judgement given on the 14th January 2014 is substantially just. The Cardinal Principle is that the Court should not raise plea which are not expressly authorised by the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure, orfrom considerations of a Public Order, otherwise any legal matter can be raised by the Court.
...........omissis...........
13. Irrespectively of the fact whether the Court of First Instance had the right to raise ex officioa question of nullity of the agreement, it is a cardinal matter that before a judgement is delivered, the parties are allowed to plead on the matter.
...........omissis...........
14. That infact in the judgement of the Court of Appeal in the names Kevin Chircop vs Joseph Chircop (decided on the 1st December, 2006) whereby the Court had ex officio raised the question regarding juridical interest without the parties having had the opportunity to make submissions before the judgement was delivered, the Court of Appeal revoked the judgement of the Court of First Instance.
15. That this means that the judgement appealed is null in terms of Article 790 of Cap. 12, consideredthat the applicant was never given the opportunity to discuss this point.
Nature and Effects of the Agreement.
16. That without prejudice to the premised, the applicant does not agree with the motivation reached by the Court of First Instanceto uphold the plea of precription raised by the respondent Assuero Ellul.
17. That in the first place,it is to be pointed out in so far as the Court of First Instance had to consider whether the agreement of the 4th June, 1999 was infact an agreementregulated by the provisions of Cap. 364. The Court felt that the agreement was a preliminary agreement, and that it had all the requisites of a preliminary agreement although it did not elaborate such motivation.
18. The agreement that had been made between the applicant and the respondent Assuero Ellul dated 4th June, 1999 consisted principally in a compromise.
19. That in any case independently from the validity of the same agreement, and even if it had to be stated for the sake of argument that the agreement is null, such nullity is only relative to the nature of the document as a preliminary agreement.
...........omissis...........
20. That thus as shall be stated later on in terms of the declarations made in the same agreement by the respondent qua debtor of the applicant for the legitim consist in valid declarations which amount to a recognition of the right of the applicants due to him in the sense of the provisions of Article 2123 of the Civil Code.
The Plea of Prescription.
21. That the Court of First Instance in the light of the judgements quoted by it agreed with the version of the applicantthat the ten year period under Article 845 (1) of the Civil Codeon which it appears that the first plea of the respondent was basedis a period of normal prescription not forfeiture as the respondent was insisting.
22. That the applicant in regard to the matter points out that as retained by the Court of First Instance, the period in question is not a period of forfeiture but normal prescription.
...........omissis...........
23. That the Court of First Instance failed to take into consideration two importantaspects which were considered before it regarding the elements of precription and the provisions regulating the same.
24. That once this term is prescriptive, there apply the general principles of law regarding prescription, including Article 2125 of Cap. 16 of the Laws of Malta.
...........omissis...........
25. That furthermore and always without prejudice to the premised, the Court of First Instance failed also to consider the judicial letter exhibited as Doc RG 4 with the original sworn application dated 28th March, 2008 filed by the applicant againstthe other heirs Victoria Agius and Maria Parnis, and notified to you on the 3rd April, 2008and the 8th April respectively.
26. That in any casefrom the said agreement, it results that the respondent qua heir and thus debtor of the applicant for the legitim due to him had acknowledged the right of the applicant to the said legitim, and thus the precription under Article 845 could not be raised against the applicant during these last ten years which by agreement between the parties the said agreement remained in force.
...........omissis...........
27. That without prejudice to the premised, it is pointed out with respect that the principle on which the said Article 845 (1) of the Civil Code is based is that which stoppedinheritance causes or a share of an inheritanceagainst whom for ten years shall have kept in his possession as the ownerthe property belonging to the inheritanceagainst which the hereditary action is instituted.
...........omissis...........
28. That the jurisprudence on the matter is a constant one whereby it was always heldthat once the nature of the pleais similar to the plea of acquistive prescription, there should result not only the passive element oftime but the active element of possession.
...........omissis...........
29. That contrary to that concluded, the Court of First Instance felt that possession belonged to the respondents, in this case no proof was forthcomingthat the respondenthad in his possession the reserved portion belonging to the applicants in the manner witheld in the judgements of ourCourts.
...........omissis...........
30. That from the totality of the proof, the Court of First Instance could not reasonably reach the conclusion that the plea raised by the respondentcould not be upheld and this as it appears that although the same respondenthad the possession ofthe legitim due to the applicant, he was holding this reserved portion not ‘animo domini’, but in the interest of the applicanttill the assigning of the legitim to the applicant.
................omissis...............
Thus the applicant whilst referring to the proof already produced and reserving to bring forward further proof permitted by law, respectfully prays that this Honourable Court, upholds the appeal, by upholding the grievances brought by the applicant in this application, revokes and cancelsthe judgement given by the First Hall Civil Court, on the 14th January, 2014 in the names premised rejects the plea brought by the respondent Assuero Ellul and sends back the records to the Court of First Instance for continuation of the gathering of the proof regarding the applicant’s demands, and this with costs against the respondent.
Applicant: Tassuero, Triq L-Iżbark tat-Torok, Qajjenza.
Services: 1. Assuero Ellul, 24, Triq San Mikiel, Birżebbuġa.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LL.D.
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 581
581By means of a decree given on the 6th April, 2014 by the Rural Leases Control Board, in the records of theApplication in the names Architect Ian Zammit vs Anthony Tonna, applicationnumber 17/13 FDP, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent in terms of Article 187 (3) et. seq. of Chapter 12.
By means of a Sworn Application filed in the Rural Leases Control Board, in the names Architect Ian Zammit (ID 348064M) vs Anthony Tonna (ID 770337M), on the 9th December, 2013 the applicant Architect Ian Zammit askedthis Honourable Court:
To declare that the respondent is in delay in the payment of the agricultural rent mentioned in the application, and violated the conditions of the lease, and consequently authorise the applicant to take back possession of the same land within a short and peremptory period not before the 15th August, 2014 and this under the opportune and reasonable provisions.
With costs against the respondent from now summoned so that a reference to his evidence be made.
Applicant: Flat 2, Crossroads, Triq Bellavista, San Ġwann.
Respondent: 3, Triq is-Siġġiewi, Mqabba.
TheApplication in the names Architect Ian Zammit vs Anthony Tonna, application number 17/13 FDP, has beendeferred for hearing to the 28th May, 2014 at 9.00 a.m.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LL.D.
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 582
582By a decree given by the Civil Court First Hall,on the26th February, 2014 on the application of Bank of Valletta plc, of Tuesday, 27th May, 2014 at half past ten in the morning (10.30 a.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 property:
The maisonette numbered thirty seven (37), named ‘Monthel’, in Triq San Mikiel, Birżebbuġa, with its airspace, overlying on third parties garages, free and unencumbered, valued at one hundred and ninety five thousand Euro (€195,000).
The said tenement is the property of Micallef Simon (I.D.455366 M).
N.B. The said tenement will be sold as described in the acts of the file number 53/13.
Marvic Farrugia
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 583
583By a decree of the 25th February, 2014 given by the First Hall of Civil Courts, orders 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).
That by the application filed by Cynthia Casha on the 17th October, 2013 is asking for the withdrawal of the amount of €1,684.25 deposited by the schedule of deposit number 1816/13 and 1850/13 in the names of Cynthia Casha (ID 591578M) vs James Stewart Veneziani (ID 500090M).
The Court orders the notification of this application with four days to file a reply.
Marvic Farrugia
For the Registry of Courts and Civil Tribunals
Notice 584
584NOTICE
Whereas the plaintiff Joseph Sammut (ID 396673M), filed an application under oath (No. 281/13 RGM) demanding Correction in the Act of Birth of the minor child Rebecca Sammut, number 4168/2003 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 585
585By a decree given by the Civil Court First Hall, on the 3rd April, 2014 on the application of Gatt Joseph, Tuesday, 13th May, 2014 at half past ten in the morning (10.30 a.m.), has been fixed for the Sale by Auction to be held on the first floor of these Courts of Justice, Republic Street, Valletta, of the following property:
The villa semi detached named ‘Harmony’, and garage basement level, in Triq il-Belt Valletta, Attard, free and unencumbered, valued in three hundred and fifty thousand Euro (€350,000).
The said tenement is the property of Joseph Gatt.
N.B. The said tenement will be sold as described in the report sworn by Architect Alan Saliba on the 9th March, 2012.
Marvic Farrugia
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 586
586Notice is hereby given that by means of an application filed in the Civil Court (Voluntary Jurisdiction Section), on the 3rd of April, 2014 number 301/2014 by Marlon Briffa, wherein he requested to be declared open in his favour in full the Succession of his father Paolo Briffa (ID 82529M), son of the late Giovanni and Giulia née Avallone, born at Żabbar, resided at Paola, and died at Tal-Qroqq, Imsida, on the 7th of December, 2013 aged 84 years.
Thus whoever considers that he has an interest is called so that by means of a note he enters his opposition within fifteen days from the posting of the banns and the notices according to law.
Marcel Bugeja
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 587
587By means of a decree given on the 27th March, 2014 in the records of the Protest, in the names Raymond Zammit et vs Annemarie Gauci et, Protest number 5423/13, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondents Anne Marie and Kenneth Gauci in terms of Article 187 (3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.
In the First Hall Civil Court
Judicial Protest No 543/13
Raymond Zammit (ID 250659M) and Silvana Zammit (ID 690061M) vs Annemarie Gauci (ID 514570M) and her husband Kenneth Gauci (ID 242571M), and the Land Registrar.
Judicial Protest of Raymond Zammit (ID 250659M) and his wife Silvana Zammit (ID 690061M).
Respectfully plead:
That the interpellants enjoy the property of a portion of Land in Triq Ġellewża s-Sewda, corner with Triq il-Muskatell, Ħ’Attard, of the global area of circa three hundred seventy two point one six square metres (372.16 square metres), which they acquired in part by means of a contract of the 21st January, 1994 in the records of Notary Mario Bugeja, as subsequently corrected by a public deed of the 25th April, 1994 in the records of the same Mario Bugeja, and in part by a contract of sale of the 9th August, 1993 in the records of Notary Pierre Falzon.
That by means of the contract of Notary Pierre Falzon, of the 9th August, 1993 the interpellants acquired a divided portion of land of the area of sixty eight pointone sixsquare metres (68.16 square metres) from Renato, sive Renè Fleri Soler, father of the respondent Annemarie Gauci.
That the interpellants have possessed this portion of land, including the part from the father of the respondent Gauci, in an exclusive, public, peaceful, continuous, and uninterrupted manner for twenty years, and still possess the same till this day.
That lately the interpellants came to know that part of the land they had acquired from the father of the respondent Gauci is registered by a title guaranteed in her name, and in the name of her father the respondent Kenneth Gauci, after he allegedly he acquired it as part of a larger plot from the Government of Malta, by contract of Notary John Spiteri, of the 21st May, 2002.
That it results that on the said transfer, the Government of Malta did not guarantee that this part of the property of the interpellants was infact its property. Till this day, this same plot of land was never in the possession of the respondents Gauci because it is incoporatedin the larger land of the interpellants, and closed from the rest by means of a wall. Furthermore, this plot of land is dividedfrom the rest of the land that the respondents Gauci acquired by means of the contract mentioned of Notary John Spiteri, of the 2nd May, 2002 by means of a dividing wall which the respondents Gauci built to divide their property which developed in a residential home from the land in question of the interpellants.
That it is thus clear that the interpellants have a good property titleon the parcel of land of the area of 68.16 square metres which they acquired from Renato, sive Renè Fleri Soler by means of a contract of Notary Pierre Falzon, of the 9th August, 1993 and in any case they have an interest that it prevails on the same in terms of Article 43 (1) of Cap. 296 of the Laws of Malta.
Thus whilst bringing the above to the formal notice of all the respondents, the interpellants pleaded:
(i) that the respondents Annemarie Gauci and her husband Kenneth Gauci so that within one week, they come forward to the correction ofthe registration of title regarding the plot of land above mentioned in Triq il-Ġellewża s-Sewda, Ħ’Attard, which the interpellants had acquired from the father of the same respondent Annemarie Gauci, in such a manner that this land is registered in the name of the interpellant;
(ii) the respondent Land Registrar so that within the same time he corrects the said registration in terms of Article 51 (1) (F) of Cap. 296 of the Laws of Malta;
(iii) in default, all therespondents to come forward to the liquidation and payment of all the damages suffered, and that the interpellants can suffer as a result of the bad registration of the said plot of land in Triq il-Ġellewża s-Sewda, Ħ’Attard, in the name of the respondents Gauci, including damages for loss of profit and loss, and for this purpose they are from now putting them in dolo, culpa and mora for all intents and purposes of law.
With costs and interest.
Protesting Parties: (1)AnnemarieGauci, 39, Fairy Bluebird, Triq Tumas Chetcuti, Ħ’Attard.
(2) Kenneth Gauci, 39, Fairy Bluebird, Triq Tumas Chetcuti, Ħ’Attard.
(3) Land Registrar, Casa Bolino, Triq il-Punent, Valletta.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LL.D.
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 588
588NOTICE
Whereas the plaintiff Kevin Mallia (ID 360577M) and Angela Mallia (ID 0044776A), filed an application under oath (No. 67/2014 AL), demanding Correction inthe Act of Birth of the minor Benjamin James Mallia Gerth number 2103/2009 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.
Rita Mangion
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 589
589It is hereby notified that by virtue of a decree delivered during the sitting of the 8th April, 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 Simon Baldacchino, of Tropicana, Block A, Flat 2, Girgor Buttigieg Street, Nadur, Gozo.
The plaintiff company Go plc, of Fra Diego Street, Marsa, Malta, filed a claim in the Small Claims Tribunal (Gozo), Case number 7/2014 (KM) in the names of Go plc vs Simon Baldacchino, on the 10th March, 2014 wherein it requested the Tribunal to condemn the defendant to pay it the amount of €341.52 for DSL service. With costs and interest.
The case is differed to the 8th May, 2014 at 8.45 a.m.
Sharon Calleja
For the Registrar
Notice 590
590It is being notified that by a decree dated 2nd April, 2014 given by the Court of Magistrates (Gozo) as a Court of Criminal Inquiry (Magistrate Dr Neville Camilleri BA,LLD, MA, (Fin. Serv.), Preliminary Investigation number 71/2013 in the case: The Police (Inspector Bernard Charles Spiteri) versus Susan Bugeja, 45 years of age, daughter of Philip and of Carmelina née Zammit, born in Ħ’Attard, Malta, on the 26th May, 1968 and residing at 51, Għajnsielem Street, Għajnsielem, Gozo, identity card number 228468M, ordered the attachment in the hands of third parties in general all monies, and other moveable property due, or pertaining, or belonging to Susan Bugeja, and prohibits the said accused from transferring, pledging, hypothecating, or otherwise disposing of any moveable or immovable property in terms of Article 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, Cap. 373 of the Laws of Malta, and Article 23A (2) of the Criminal Code, Cap. 9 of the Laws of Malta.
The Court in terms of the proviso to Article 5 (1) (b) of Cap. 373 of the Laws of Malta conceded the accused to receive the amount of €13,976.24c per annum.
Dr Mary Debono Borg LL.D.
Registrar Gozo Courts and Tribunals
Notice 591
591By a decree given by the Civil Court First Hall, on the 25th March, 2014 on the application of Pauline Debono (I.D. 676160M), Tuesday, 20th May, 2014 at half past eleven in the morning (11.30 a.m.), has been fixed for the Sale by Auction to be held in the corridor of the first floor of these Courts of Justice, Republic Street, Valletta, of the following property:
The apartment internally marked 8, Flamingo Court, Triq Żarenu Dalli, Birżebbuġa, having about 130 square metres of internal space, and valued by the appointed architect in the amount of one hundred and ten thousand Euro (€110,000).
The said tenement is the property of Darren Decelis (I.D. 56388M).
N.B. The said tenement will be sold as described in the acts of judicial sale 50/13.
Rudolph Marmarà
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 592
592It is being notified that by a decree dated 8th April, 2014 given by the Court of Magistrates (Malta) as a Court of Criminal Inquiry (Magistrate Dr Carol Peralta LLD), Compilation number 321/2014 in the case: The Police (Inspector Daniel Zammit) (Inspector Roderick Zammit) versus Anthony Mifsud, 50 years, Skilled Labourer, son of Giovanni and Maria née Vella, born in Pietà, on the 27th January, 1964 and residing at 11, ‘Paradise View’, Il-Girna Street, Rabat, and holder of identity card bearing number 77164M, ordered the attachment in the hands of third parties in general all monies, and other moveable property due, or pertaining, or belonging to Anthony Mifsud, and prohibits the said accused from transferring, pledging, hypothecating, or otherwise disposing of any moveable or immovable property, and this according to Article 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, Cap. 373 of the Laws of Malta, and to Article 23 A (2) of the Criminal Code, Cap. 9 of the Laws of Malta.
The Court ordered that the said accused may receive thirteen thousand nine hundred and seventy six Euro and twenty four cents (€13,976.24) per year.
Dr Yvette Borg LL.D.
For the Registrar Criminal Courts and Criminal Tribunals
Bann for Curators
593Republic of Malta
To the Court Marshall
By means of a decree given by this Court, on the 10th November, 2014 following a requestof Bajja Developments Limited et,it was ordered that Deputy Curators be chosen to representStarwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Incin the records of the Sworn Applicationnumber 955/10 GC, in the names Bajja Developments Limited et vs Deputy Curators, and in the relative and subsequent acts.
By means of the Sworn Application filed in the First Hall Civil Court, in the names Bajja Developments Limited (C 13819) and Bajja Investments Limited (C 13745) vs Meridien S.A.S. and Deputy Curators to represent the foreign companies Starwood Hotels & Resorts WorldwideInc and Starwood Eame Services Company BVBA, on the 22nd September, 2010 the applicant Bajja Developments Limited (C 12819) and Bajja Investments Limited (C 13745) asked this Honourable Courtin view of that premised in the application:
To declare the respondent companies in solidum or either of whom responsible for the damages suffered by the applicant companies, and uphold the other demands in the application.
With costs and interest to run according to law against the respondent companieswhose representatives are summoned so that a reference to their evidence be made.
Applicant: 39, Main Street, St Julians.
Respondents: Meridien S.A.S. Tour Maine Montparnasse, 14e, Etage 33 Avenue du Maine, 75015, Paris, France.
Starwood Eame Services Company BVBA - Rue de Brederode 2-6 - Brussels BE B-100, Belgium.
Deputy Curators in representation of the foreign company Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc with an address 2231, East Camelback Road, 400, Phoenix AZ 85016 -United States of America.
You are therefore ordered to affix an official copy of this bann at the entrance of this Superior Court, and to summon whosoever wishes to act as curator to appear before this Registry within six days, and by means of a minute to submit a declaration that he wishes so to act.
You are also ordered to inform each one that if he fails to make this declaration within the stipulated time, the Court will proceed to the selection of Curators of Office.
And after so acting, or if you should encounter any difficulty in the execution of this bann, you are to inform forthwith this Court.
Given by the Civil Court First Hall above mentioned with the witness of the Hon. Mr Justice Lino Farrugia Sacco LL.D. Doctor of Laws.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LL.D.
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 594
594By a decree given by the Civil Court First Hall, on the 12th March, 2014 on the application of Volksbank Malta Limited, Thursday, 29th May, 2014 at nine in the morning (11.30 a.m.), for the Sale by Auction to be held on the first floor, Courts of Justice, Republic Street, Valletta, of the following properties:
The tenement numbered sixteen (16), in Triq il-Karmnu, St Julians, including the garden and the overlying space, which tenement overlies part of property numbered fifteen (15), free and unencumbered, with all its rights and enjoyments.
The tenement numbered sixteen (15), in Triq il-Karmnu, St Julians, underlying tenement numbered sixteen (16), free and unencumbered, with all its rights and enjoyments.
The two (2) garages, unofficially numbered seven (7) and eight (8), without airspace, forming part of a block of apartments and garages underlying, which garages are accessible from a common entrance numbered twenty (20), named ‘Navillus’, in Triq Lapsi, St Julians, free and unencumbered, with all their rights and enjoyments.
The said tenements are the property of Dr Patrick Valentino et nomine.
Rudolph MarmarÀ
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 595
595NOTICE
Whereas Vladyslava Andriivna Kravchenko (ID 0581712L), filed an application under oath (No. 106/2014/LSO), demanding Correction in the Act of Birth number 5817/2012 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 596
596By means of a decree given by the Civil Court First Hall, on the 4th March, 2014 in the records of the Sworn Application, in the names Mark Carabott D’Amato vs Aaron Grech, application number 807/12 GC, 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 a Notice of hearing of a cause issued by the Registry Superior Courts, on Friday,31st January, 2014 the cause Application Number 807/12 GC,in the names Carabott D’Amato Mark et vs Grech Aaron, which was reappointed from Sine Die on Thursday, 28th November, 2013 was set down again for hearing on Thursday, 20th February, 2014 at 9.00 a.m. before Mr Justice Gino Camilleri, and deferred to the 16th May, 2014 at 9.00 a.m.
Respondent: 34, Xandrija, Triq il-Ħarruba, Mġarr, Malta.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LL.D.
For the Registrar Civil Courts and Tribunals