Go Back
Court Notices published in Govt. Gazette No. 19,482 of 6 October 2015
01/01/2015
Bann for Curators
1559Republicof Malta
ToThe Marshall of the Court.
Bymeans of a decree by this Court, on the 7th August 2015, following a request ofFimbank plc, it was ordered ordered that deputy curators be chosen to representthe absent Suheyla Dogan, in the records of the judicial letter number2776/2015, hereunder brought forward, in the names Fimbank plc vs KuraturiDeputati and in the relative and subsequent acts.
Inthe First Hall Civil Court
To i) Arex LLP 6th Floor 32, Ludgate Hill,London, United Kingdom.
(ii)Deputy Curators to represent the absent Atilla Dogan (passport number U05067748) with an address Arayoloud Flora, Evlert Fulyo Blk D, 34, Atasehir,Istanbul, Turkey.
(iii)Deputy Curators to represent the absent Suheyla Dogan (passport number U01523679) with an address Arayoloud Flora, Evlert Fulyo Blk D, 34, Atasehir,Istasnbul, Turkey.
(iv)Deputy Curators to represent the absent companmy A.S.D. Enerji MadencilikPetrol Urunleri Sanayi vs Dis Ticaret Anonim Sirketi, with an address KayisdagiCaddesi Bilgi, Plaza No 111, Kat 4, Daire 8, Kucukbakkalkoy –Kadikoy, Istanbul,Turkey.
Bythe present judicial letter FIM Bank p.l.c. (C 17003) refers to the agreementof the 30th May 2013, between the interpellant company and the company Arex LLPby means of which Arex LLP was given the banking facility consisting inUncommitted Revolving Import Trade Finance Facility as subsequently amended onthe 30th November 2014, on the 22nd December 2014 and the 10th May 2015 (the facility).
FimBankp.l.c. refers also to the agreements between (1) itself and Attilla Dogan andSuheyla Dogan, on the 30th May 2014, whereby Attilla Dogan and Suheyla Dogan,constituted themselves as sureties in solidum together with Arex LLP for therepayment of any unsettled debt that there might be in terms of the Facilityand ii) between it and A.S.D. Enerji Madencilik Petrol Urunleri Sanayi ve DisTicaret Anonim Sirketi Kayasdagi Caddedssi Bilgi (A.S.D.) of the 30th May 2014,whereby A.S.D. constituted itself a surety in solidum together with AREX LLPfor the repayment of anynsettled debt that there might be in terms of theFacility.
Thatit results that AREX LLP failed its contractual obligations and did not pay thependencies due in terms of the Facility. On the 16th July 2015, theinterpellant company sent a Notice of Default to Arex LLP whereby it demandedthe payment of the amount of USD 602,007.70 equivalent to €544,819.06 accordingto the rate of exchange of 1.1070 due according to the facility. Another letterwas sent on the same day to the respondents Dogan as well to A.S.D. as suretyin solidum whereby they were asked to pay the debt to FIMBANK p.l.c.
Thatthus Arex LLP, Atilla Dogan, Suheyla Dogan and A.S.D. are debtors in solidum ofthe interpellant company in the amount of USD 602,007.70 equivalent to€544,819.06 according to the rate of exchange 1.1070 besides interest.... Thecompany FimBank p.l.c. formally calls upon you so that within three days fromthe date when you recieve this letter you pay the amount of USD 602,007.70equivalent to €544,819.06 according to the rate of exchange of 1.1070.
In default, the company Fimbank p.l.c. shallproceed further against you without any other prior notice.
Somuch so that you may know how to regulate youselves.
Withcosts and interests applicable according to the facility.
Interpellantcompany: FimBank p.l.c. Mercury Tower, The Exchange Financial & BusinessCentre, Elia Zammit Street, St. Julians, STJ 3155.
Respondents:(i) 6th Floor, 32, Ludgate Hill, London, United Kingdom.
(ii)Deputy Curators.
(iii)DeputyCurators.
(iv)Deputy Curators.
Youare therefore ordered to affix an official copy of this bann at the entrance ofthis Superior Court and to summon whosoever wishes to act as curator to appearbefore this Registry within six days and by means of a minute to submit adeclaration that he wishes so to act.
Youare also ordered to inform each one that if he fails to make this declarationwithin the stipulated time, the Court will proceed to the selection of Curatorsof Office.
Andafter so acting or if you ahould encounter any difficulty in the execution ofthis bann, you are to inform forthwith this Court.
Givenby the Civil Court First Hall, above mentioned, with the witness of the Hon.Mr. Justice Anthony Ellul, LLD, Doctor of Laws.
ADV.FRANK PORTELLI, LLD
Forthe Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1560
1560ITIS BEING NOTIFIED that by a judgement given by the Court of Magistrates (Malta)Court of Criminal Judicature (Magistrate Dr. Consuelo Scerri Herrera LLD) onthe 3rd September 2015, in the case in the names:
ThePolice
(InspectorJonathan Ferris)
vs
NICOLAI(NICOLAI-CHRISTIAN) MAGRIN, 40 years, son of Alfred and Maria Victoria néeCassar, born in St. Julians Malta on the 31st October 1974, residing at number28, Depiro Street, Sliema Malta and holder of Identity Card number 528174(M);
ORDEREDthe interdiction for the period on ten (10) years from today against the saidNICOLAI (NICOLAI-CHRISTIAN) MAGRIN according to Article 10(6) of Cap. 9 of theLaws of Malta.
Thisis being published according to section 10(7) of Cap. 9 of the Laws of Malta.
DRJOHN SEYCHELL NAVARRO
Dip.Hlth Science, Dip Mgmt Stud., Dip. Not. Pub., LLB, LLD
Assistant Registrar Criminal Courts and CriminalTribunals
Notice 1561
1561Bymeans of a decree of the 8th May 2015 of the Civil Court First Hall in therecords of judicial letter number 299/15, in the names Commissioner of Revenuevs Victor Gauci et, the following publication for the purpose of serviceof the respondents was ordered in terms ofArticle 187(3) et seq of Cap. 12.
Inthe First Hall of the Civil Court
ToVictor Gauci (ID 461568M) of 37,Triq tal-Braġ, Mellieħa.
VG Shutter and Concrete Works Limited (C21877)of 102, Triq tal-Braġ, Mellieħa.
Bythe present the Commissioner of Revenue of Centre Point Building, Ta’ ParisRoad, Birkirkara, calls upon you in terms of Article 59 of Cap. 406 of the Lawsof Malta, so that within two (2) days from the serviceof this judicial act, you pay the amount of€12,829.04 representing amount due by you as Value Added Tax (VAT 98) due byyou.
Theamount mentioned is still due although you were solicited several times bymeans of a notice issued by the Commissioner of Revenue in terms of Article 59of Cap. 406 of the Laws of Malta (Doc A).
Thiscalling is being made for all intents and purposes of law, inclunding but notlimitedly, in order to render the executive title which the Commissioner ofRevenue has against you.
Ifyou fail to abide with this calling you are informed that the Commissioner ofRevenue shall pass to execute the said executive title he has against you.
Withcosts and interest according to Cap. 406 of the Laws of Malta.
Somuch so that you may know how to regulate yourselves.
Service: Maria Rosaria Gauci as company secretary of VG Shutter and Concrete WorksLimited of 102, Triq tal-Brag, Mellieħa.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1562
1562Bymeans of a decree of the 31st July 2015 of the Civil Court First Hall in therecords of judicial letter number 2679/2011, in the names Commissioner of ValueAdded Tax vs Carmel Gauci, the following publication for the purpose ofserviceof the respondent was ordered interms of Article 187 (3) of Cap. 12.
Inthe First Hall of the Civil Court
ToCarmel Gauci (ID 840248M) of 100, Notte Repos, Flat 1, Triq Ġnien Ingraw,Mellieħa.
Bythe present the Commissioner of Value Added Tax of Centre Point Building, Ta’Paris Road, Birkirkara, calls upon you in terms of Article 59 of Act XXIII of1998 so that within two (2) days from the serviceof this act, you pay the amount of€189,579.56 representing amount due by you as Value Added Tax according to thesaid Act.
Withcosts and interest from the day when the amount de quo was due till the date ofeffective payment.
Thiscalling is being made for all intents and purposes of law and particularly, butnot exclusively, in order to render executable the executive title which thesame Commissioner of Value Added Tax has against you by means of a notice sentto you.
Indefault, the interpellant shall pass to execute the said executive title he hasagainst you by means of the opportune warrants.
Somuch so that you may know how to regulate yourself and to proceed.
Withcosts.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1563
1563By means of a decree given, by the First Hall CivilCourt, on the 14th July 2015, in the records of the Sworn Application, in thenames Cassar George et vs Falzon Emanuel et, application number 583/15 LSO, thefollowing publication was ordered for the purpose of serviceof the respondents spouses Falzon, in termsof Article 187(3) et. seq of Cap 12.
By means of a Sworn Application, filed, in the First HallCivil Court, in the names George Cassar (ID 739836(M) in his own name and inthe name of his absent sister Theresa wife of Raymond Buttigieg, EspeditoCassar (ID 471842(M) in his own name and in the name of his absent siblingsOlga wife of Joseph Ellul, and Pauline wife of Richard Moverley as well asMaria Assunta sive Maria wife of Carmelo Galea (ID 137341M) as well as JonathanBorg (ID 021477M) and his brother Lino Borg (ID 136274M) and their fatherCarmelo Borg (ID867938(M) as successors in title of Carmela wife of the saidCarmelo Borg, Agnes wife of Emanuel Marmara (ID 572445M) and George Cassar (ID396256M)Mary Louise Schembri (ID 298158(M) Carmen Grima (ID 050562M) andElizabeth Falzon (ID 112665M) siblings Cassar, children of the late John Cassarvs Emanuel Falzon (ID 823531M) and his wife Marty Falzon (ID 67536M) andPaolino Schembri (ID 700560M) and his wife Ursula Schembri (ID 5896A) on the15th June 2015, the applicants asked this Honourable Court;
1.To condemn the respondents so that within a short and peremptory period fixedto them they return the vacant possession of the shop without number and formspart of the block named ‘Twiggy’ in Triq Manuel, Gżira, saving a declarationthat the respondents have no title and uphold the other demands in theapplication.
Withinterests and with costs, against the respondents summoned so that a referenceto their evidence be made.
Respondents:Emanuel Falzon and his wife Mary Falzon, 21, Flat 5, Ix-Xatt ta’ Tigné, Sliema.
TheSworn Application in the names Cassar George et vs Falzon Emanuel et,application number 583/15 LSO, has been deferred to the 22nd October 2015, at9.30 a.m.
ADV.FRANK PORTELLI, LLD.
Forthe Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals.
Notice 1564
1564By means of an application filed in the Civil Court ofVoluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 17th September 2015, Application number957/2015 by Antonia Portanier and Carmen Mallia whereby they prayed that it bedeclared open in their favour in equal shares between them the SUCCESSION oftheir brother Joseph Rosario Tanti, bachelor, son of the late Carmel andPhilippa née Gatt, born in Pieta, resided in Għaxaq and died in Pietà on the28th June 2015 aged 58, holding identity card number 0420657(M), intestate.
Whereforeany person who considers to have an interest in the matter is hereby calledupon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections heretoby a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns andnotices according to law.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar Civil Court and Tribunals
Notice 1565
1565By means of an application filed in the Civil Court ofVoluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 22nd September 2015, Application number968/2015 by Giżimina sive Disma Micallef, George Catania and Maria Carmela siveCarmen Gauci all aunties and uncles of the decujus whereby they prayed that itbe declared open in their favour in equal shares betweent them the SUCCESSIONof their nephew Anthony Micallef, bachelor, son of the late Victor Micallef andGemma née Catania, born and resided in Ħal Qormi and died on the 1st February2015 aged 57, holding identity card number 0382957(M), holding a will but hedidn’t nominate any heirs.
Whereforeany person who considers to have an interest in the matter is hereby calledupon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections heretoby a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns andnotices according to law.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar Civil Court and Tribunals
Notice 1566
1566Bymeans of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary JurisdictionSection, on the 27th July 2015, Application number 778/2015 by Tawfik MohamedBurshan, Lutfi Mohamed Asseem Burshan, Ali Mohamed Asseem Burshan, ElhamMohamed Asseem Burshan, Layla Mohamed Asseem Burshan u Tarek Mohamed AsseemBurshan whereby they prayed that it be declared open in their favour in thequota of one sixth (1/6) undivided share each one of them the SUCCESSION ofMohamed Asim Burshan, son of the late Assim Burshan and Maruma née Khazmi,born, resided and died in Tripoli Libya on the 11th December 2004 aged 78,intestate.
Whereforeany person who considers to have an interest in the matter is hereby calledupon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections heretoby a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns andnotices according to law.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar Civil Court and Tribunals
Notice 1567
1567Bymeans of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary JurisdictionSection, on the 10th September 2015, Application number 936/2015 by Charles,Joseph, Raphael, Mary Vella and Susan Sammutall brothers and sisters Chetcutiwhereby they prayed that it be declared open in their favour in equal sharesbetween them the SUCCESSION of their father Giovanni Chetcuti, son of the lateRaffaele and Michelina née Frendo, born and resided in Mosta and died inTal-Qroqq, Msida on the 28th March 2015 aged 85, holding identity card number0103630(M), intestate.
Whereforeany person who considers to have an interest in the matter is hereby calledupon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections heretoby a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns andnotices according to law.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar Civil Court and Tribunals
Notice 1568
1568Bymeans of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary JurisdictionSection, on the 10th September 2015, Application number 932/2015 by TheresaDebono and others whereby they prayed that it be declared open in favour of thesame Theresa Debono and this in the quota of one half (1/2) undivided share andin favour of Joseph, Carmelo and Mark Anthony all brothers Debono, children ofthe decujus and this in the quota of seventh (1/7) undivided share each one ofthem the SUCCESSION of Alfred Debono, son of the late Carmelo and Theresa néeCallus, born in Żebbuġ, Malta where he resided and died on the 8th December2009 aged 65, holding identity card number 1064744(M) intestate.
Whereforeany person who considers to have an interest in the matter is hereby calledupon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections heretoby a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns andnotices according to law.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar Civil Court and Tribunals
Notice 1569
1569Bymeans of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary JurisdictionSection, on the 10th September 2015, Application number 934/2015 by SarahVictoria Vella and Eve Michelle Elizabeth Pavan whereby they prayed that it bedeclared open in favour their favour in equal shares between them theSUCCESSION of their mother Elizabeth Diane Dillard, also known as Vella, alsoas Pavan and also as Makela, divorced, daughter of Salvatore Falzon and Dianenée Peterson, born in Millbrae, California, United States of America, residedin Oregan, United States of America where she died on the 11th February 2015aged 52, intestate, holding American Passport number B2446422.
Whereforeany person who considers to have an interest in the matter is hereby calledupon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections heretoby a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns andnotices according to law.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
For theRegistrar Civil Court and Tribunals
Notice 1570
1570Bymeans of a decree of the 21st May 2015, in the records of the judicial letternumber 470/15, in the names HSBC Bank Malta p.l.c. vs Zanev ExcavationsLimited, the First Hall of the Civil Courts ordered the following publicationfor the purpose of effecting service on the respondents in terms of Article187(5) of Cap. 12.
Inthe First Hall of the Civil Court
ToZanev Excavations Limited (C-43047)
11/13,Triq Gio Dei Markezi Mallia Tabone,
Mosta.
Bymeans of this present HSBC Bank Malta p.l.c. (C3177) of 32, Merchants Street,Valletta, solicits you so that within two days you pay these amounts of:
1.€43,790.57 out of which €39,586.40 as capital sum due and €4,204.17 representinterest due that accrued on the capital from the 29th January 2015, which sumis due on account number 009-013673-300, which sum was duly given to you in theLoan Account facility, with the interpellant bank and accepted by you, besidesthe interest from the 30th January 2015 till the date of this letter, togetherwith further legal interest on the capital sum from the date of this lettertill the date of effective payment, which amount although you were repeatedlysolicited to pay, failed to do so; and
2.€36,800.63 out of which €33,266.94 as capital sum due and €3,533.69 representinterest due that accrued on the capital from the 29th January 2015, which sumis due on account number 009-013673-300, which sum was duly given to you in theLoan Account facility, with the interpellant bank and accepted by you, besidesthe interest from the 30th January 2015 till the date of this letter, togetherwith further legal interest on the capital sum from the date of this lettertill the date of effective payment, which amount although you were repeatedlysolicited to pay, failed to do so; and
3.€52,769.38 out of which €47,702.33 as capital sum due and €5,067.05 representinterest due that accrued on the capital till the 30th January 2015, which sumis due on account number 009-013673-340 previously holding number009-013673-001, which sum was duly given to you in the Overdraft Accountfacility, with the interpellant bank and accepted by you, besides the interestfrom the 31st January 2015 till the date of this letter, together with furtherlegal interest on the capital sum from the date of this letter till the date ofeffective payment, which amount although you were repeatedly solicited to pay,failed to do so.
Toavoid useless Court costs, if the payment of the debt above mentioned is notpossible and you néed more time for monthly payments, you can admit your debtwith the Bank by means of a notorial act. In this case you are advised thatwithin fifteen days from the service of this letter you advise the Bank andengage a Notary.
Thisletter is being filed as well to interrupt prescription and as requested by lawin terms of article 2128 of the Civil Code (Cap. 16 of the Laws of Malta).
Indefault further action will be taken against you in Court without any furthernotice.
Somuch so that you may know how to regulate yourselves.
Withcosts.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1571
1571Bymeans of a decree on the 5th July 2015, in the records of the judicial letternumber 1004/15, in the names Simonds Farsons Cisk plc vs Matthew Scicluna, theCourts of Magistrates (Malta) ordered the following publication for the purposeof service on the respondent in terms of Article 187(3) of Cap. 12.
Bymeans of a judicial letter, in terms of Article 253 and subsequent articles ofCap. 12 of the Laws of Malta, filed in the Courts of Magistrates (Malta)against Matthew Scicluna (ID 233983M) of 44, Triq Biċċieni, Sqaq Nru 8,Ħaż-Żabbar, on the 12th May 2015, Simonds Farsons Cisk plc (C-113) of TheBrewery, Mrieħel, calls upon you so that within two days you pay theinterpellant the sum of €2,267.37 representing three (3) bills of exchange, twobills of exchange of €1,000 that have matured on the 30th April 2014 and 30thApril 2014 respectively and another of €666 that has matured on the 31stDecember 2013.
Withthis judicial letter an authenticated copy of these bills of exchange abovementioned are being attached so that the debt due by you amounting to €2,267.37is being rendered executable title in terms of Article 253(3) of the Code ofOrganisation and Civil Procedure. In default of payment the interpellantcompany will proceed against you further in Court, without any further notice,including with the issue of every appropriate warrant.
Thisjudicial letter is being made for all purposes and effects of law andespecially to render the said bill of exchange executable according to law interms of Article 256(2) of Cap. 12 of the Laws of Malta.
Youare being informed also, and this as required in the proviso of paragraph (e)of Article 253 of Cap. 12 of the Laws of Malta that you can, be means of anapplication that has to be filed within twenty days from the service of thisjudicial letter, you can request the competent Court to suspend the executionof bill of exchange or bills of exchange above mentioned, in their entirety orin part, and this in case you oppose the execution of the bill of exchange orbill of exchange because the signature on the bill of exchange or bills ofexchange is not yours or of your mandatary, or if you have other grave andvalid resons to oppose the execution.
With costs of this present judicial letter, and with 8%interest per year on each bill of exchange that has matured for payment fromthe date of maturity till the date of effective payment.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1572
1572Bymeans of a decree on the 3rd September 2015, in the records of the judicialletter number 1961/14, in the names Simonds Farsons Cisk plc vs Claudio Bajada,the Courts of Magistrates (Malta) ordered the following publication for thepurpose of service on the respondent in terms of Article 187(3) of Cap. 12.
Bymeans of a judicial letter, in terms of Article 253 and subsequent articles ofCap. 12 of the Laws of Malta, filed in the Courts of Magistrates (Malta)against Claudio Bajada (ID 420279M) of 148, Triq in-Naħal, Mellieħa, on the 3rdJune 2014, Simonds Farsons Cisk plc (C-113) of The Brewery, Mrieħel, calls uponyou so that within two days you pay the interpellant the sum of €2,695.07balance from a greater amount and representing four (4) bills of exchange, asfor two (2) bills of exchange of €1,000 and as for two (2) bills of exchange of€1,333 that have matured on the 30th June 2012, on the 31st December 2012, onthe 30th June 2013 and on the 31st December 2013 (Doc A here attached) .
Withthis judicial letter an authenticated copy of these bills of exchange abovementioned are being attached so that the debt due by you amounting to €2,695.07is being rendered executable title in terms of Article 253(3) of the Code ofOrganisation and Civil Procedure. In default of payment the interpellantcompany will proceed against you further in Court, without any further notice,including with the issue of every appropriate warrant.
Thisjudicial letter is being made for all purposes and effects of law andespecially to render the said bill of exchange executable according to law interms of Article 256(2) of Cap. 12 of the Laws of Malta.
Youare being informed also, and this as required in the proviso of paragraph (e)of Article 253 of Cap. 12 of the Laws of Malta that you can, be means of anapplication that has to be filed within twenty days from the service of thisjudicial letter, you can request the competent Court to suspend the executionof bill of exchange or bills of exchange above mentioned, in their entirety orin part, and this in case you oppose the execution of the bill of exchange orbill of exchange because the signature on the bill of exchange or bills ofexchange is not yours or of your mandatary, or if you have other grave andvalid resons to oppose the execution.
With costs of this present judicial letter, and with 8%interest per year on each bill of exchange that has matured for payment fromthe date of maturity till the date of effective payment.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1573
1573By means of a decree given, by the Court of Appeal, onthe 20th July 2015, in the records of the Appeal Application, in the names APSBank Limited vs HD Holdings Limited, Application number 901/07, the followingpublication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondents HDHoldings Limited, Ronald Azzopardi, Mariella Azzopardi, and Franco Azzopardi ascompany secretary of the company HD Holdings Limited, in terms of article187(3) et seq. of Cap 12.
Bymeans of an Application of Appeal, filed in the Court of appeal, in the namesAPS Bank Limited with registration number C-2192 vs HD Holdings Limited withregistration number C-29720, Mario Galea Testaferrata and by a decree of the20th January 2009, the records of the cause were passed onto from Mario GaleaTestaferrata onto the applicants Camilla Scerri, James Galea Testaferrata,Maria Galea Testaferrata and Simon Galea Testaferrata, Ronald Azzopardi andMariella wife of the same Ronald azzopardi, for any interest they may have, onthe 14th April 2015, the applicants Camilla Scerri (ID 809458(M) James GaleaTestaferrata (ID 561360M) Maria Galea Testaferrata (ID 92166M) and Dott. SimonGalea Testaferrata (ID 468670M) siblings Galea Testaferrata on the 14th April2015, the applicants respectfully pleaded;
1.That in virtue of this cause the respondent company premised the following;
a)By means of a contract of Notary Nicholas Vella, dated 24 th November 2003, theapplicant company granted a loan to HD Holdings Ltd of € 582,343.35.
b)The credit was guaranteed by HD Holdings Ltd, by means of the granting of ageneral hypothec on all its property, present and future as well as a specialhypothec on two farmhouses, with a common entrance with official number 152,one with the name ‘Ta’ Giuseppa’ number 152A and the other with the name ‘Ta’Gianni’ number 152B, in Triq Marsalforn, Xaghra, Gozo.
c)Amongst the conditions imposed by the applicant company on the defendantcompany in the contract of loan above mentioned it was set that the samedefendant company could not give a guarantee to third parties the said twofarmhouses on which it had given a special hypothec to the applicant company.
d)That following the publication of the contract of Notary Nicholas Vella, abovementioned it resulted that by another public deed of Notary Margaret Heywood,dated 25th February 2004, the defendant company without the knowledge of theapplicant company guaranteed the debt of the defendant Roanld Azzopardi, infavour of the other defendant Mario Galea Testaferrata and constituted ageneral hypothec on all its present and future property as well as a specialhypothec on the said two farmhouses.
e)The said general hypothec and special hypothec constituted by the defendantcompany in favour of Mario Galea Testaferrata were enrolled in the Gozo PublicRegistry and the Public Registry in Malta, and furthermore the special hypothecon the said two farmhouses was registered with the Land Registry with numberLRC115/04.
f)The plaintiff company upholds that the granting of the said guarantee by thedefendant company to Mario Galea Testaferrata in order that the debt of theother defendant Ronald Azzopardi be guaranteed was made in fraud of its rightsas resulting from a contract of Notary Nicholas Vella, of the 24 th November2003.
g)The plaintiff company upholds also that the enrolments of the general hypothecson all the property of the defendant company violate and prejudice its rights.
h)That this premised the applicant respondent company asked the First Hall of theCivil Court;
i. To declare that the guarantee and the hypothecs givenby HD Holdings Limited, to Mario Galea Testaferrata by a contract of NotaryMargaret Heywood, on the 25th February 2004, ‘was made in fraud of its rightsas resulting from a contract of Notary Nicholas Vella, dated 24th November2003’.
ii.Declare that the enrolments of the special hypothec and the general one givenby HD Holdings Limited, to Mario Galea Testaferrata, ‘violate and prejudice thesaid rights of the applicant company’.
iii.Order that the granting of the guarantee and all the hypothecs by HD HoldingsLimited, in favour of Mario Galea Testaferrata ‘be rescinded and cancelledaccording to the case and declared null and without effect at law’.
2.Thatthe company HD Holdings Ltd and Ronald Azzopardi pleaded that;
a)The defendant Ronald Azzopardi in his capacity of director of the company HDHoldings Ltd and personally signed the contract mentioned (of Notary MargaretHeywood of the 25th February 2004) on the basis of fraud committed by the legalcounsel of Mario Galea Testaferrata.
b)This is being stated without prejudice to the cause presented by the applicantsagainst Mario Galea Testaferrata (Writ of Sumons 57/2005 AF) .
3.The defendant Mariella Azzopardi pleaded that;
a)In the first place she is not the right defendant to the applicant’s claims asshe never had a juridical relationship with the applicant bank.
b)The applicant has been de facto separated from her husband for various yearsand her husband the defendant Ronald Azzopardi involved himself in variousbusiness and transactions which the applicant did not know about.
c)Without prejudice to the above and as regards the merit the plaintiff’s demandsin so far as they are directed against her are unfounded in fact and at law andmerit to be rejected.
4.That the defendant Mario Galea Testaferrata pleaded that;
a)He committed no fraud and that he acted in perfect good faith.
b)The constitution of debt in the records of Notary Margaret Heywood, dated 24thFebruary 2004, is valid in its entirety as well as the hypothecs made in favourof the applicant.
c)From the searches made in time no contract between the applicant and therespondent company HD Holdings Ltd was made and thus the defendant wasabsolutely in good faith.
d)From the application no fraud resulted if ever a violation of the contractualobligations on the part of the respondent company towards the plaintiffcompany.
e)In any case the basis of the present case is without doubt the contractual relationshipbetween the applicant company and the respondent which in no way concerns thedefendant in so far as he is not affected by agreements between third parties.
f)Any prejudice which the applicant is suffering or may suffer is the cause ofthe carelesness and its gross negligence when it failed to enrol the hypothecsgiven to it by HD Holdings Ltd.
5.That by means of a judgement of the 26th Masrch 2015, the First hall CivilCourt decided to reject all the pleas of the respondents and uphold all thedemands of the plaintiff company by;
a)Declaring that the contract of Margaret Heywood, dated 25th February 2004, inso far as HD Holdings Ltd, constuituted itself a surety of the debt of thedefendant Ronald Azzopardi, in favour of the defendant Mario Galea Testaferrataand gave a guarantee consisting in a general hypothec on all its propertypresent and future and a special hypotec on the said two farmhouses as made infraud of the rights of the plaintiff company as resulting from the contract of NotaryNicholas Vella, dated 24th November 2003.
b)Declared that the enrolment of the general hypothec and the special, one in thePublic Registry of Gozo and Malta, violate and prejudice the said rights of theplaintiff company.
c)Order that the contract of Notary Margaret Heywoosd, dated 25th February 2004,in so far as the defendant company constituted itself as surety of the debt ofRonald Azzopardi, in favour of the defendant Mario Galea Testaferrata and gaveguarantees consisting in a general hypothec..omissis.. be rescinded andcancelled according to the case and be declared null and without effect.
d)Appoint Notary Sean Critien to publish the deed of rescission and cancellationrelative to thecontract of Notary Margaret Heywood, dated 25th February 2004,for the reasons herein demanded.
e)Ordered that the costs are to be paid by the respondents in solidum.
6.That the appellants felt aggrieved by the said judgement of the HonourableFirst Hall Civil Court, and are by the present filing this their humble appeal.
7.That the grievances of the appellantrs are clear and manifest and consist inthe following;
1.The First Grievance.
Lackof evaluation of the essential fact or rather negligence of the Bank whichfailed to register its hypothecs.
a)It resulted and it is not contradicted that the respondent Bank took six months(from November 2003 to May 2004) to enrol its contract of loan and register itshypothecs. This in the opinion of the appellants constitutes gross negligencesince the prompt registration of the hypothecs is essential for the ranking ofthe creditors. The Bank was duty bound to ensure that its hypothecs beregistered immediately and without delay . (as after all the appellants did)...omissis.. The appellants submit that the respondent Bank could not use thisaction to remedy its failure..omissis.. In the judgemen Moira Zammit Tabona vsSimler Ltd et (First Hall 13 th February 2013) it was held that the actiopauliana is intended for ‘everyone who is prejudiced by somebody’s else act’.All this amply results and was duly emphasised by the Court of First Instancewhich unfortunately failed to appreciate this fact.
b)It is also stated that the acceptance of the Court that such a default can beremedied by the actio pauliana creates a seious and dangerous precedent in thesense that whoever registers a hypothec in good faith (as Mario GaleaTesferrata did) shall never have the peace of mind that he shall rank accordingto the public searches..omissis.. the conclusion of the Court of First Instancethreatens the institute of hypothecs and the scope behind it.
c) Furthermore as a result of the negligence abovementioned the bank had failed to register its hypothecs thus it lost thepretended right. The Bank permitted that its rights result from the records ofNotary Nicholas Vella, in order to give the impression that they alreadyexisted. But in order that such hypothecary rights can be enforced andactualised there have to be registered in the first place..omissis..theappellants are of the firm conviction that these do not exist. This because thebank’s hypothecs were not registered at the moment that the deed impugned wasmade (25/2/2004) and were only registered various months after after thehypothecs of the appellants were registered. Thus it follows that the pretendedrights (hypothecary rights which rank before the hypothecs of the appellants)by the respondent bank were inexistent. This means that in virtue of thisaction the respondent bank is trying to safeguard a right which never existed,this is not possible since the actio pauliana is intended to safeguard existingor rights that can be actualised.
II.The Second Grievance.
Lackof appreciation of the proof – fraud on the part of Mario Galea Testaferrata.
a)Louise Spiteri in representation of the respondent bank made it clear that whenthe Bank referred to fraud or bad faith it was referring to defendants RonaldAzzopradi/or HS Holdings Ltd only and never to Mario Galea Testaferrata. Therespondent Bank never alleged deceit on the part of Mario Galea Testaferata andthus acknowledged that he was in good faith. Nothwithstanding the HonourableCourt of First Instance considered Mario Galea Testaferrata a party in thedeceit of Ronald Azzopardi/HD Holdings Ltd...omissis... From the judgementappealed it appears that the only reason given for this conclusion was thatRonald Azzopardi had infomed Mario Galea Testaferrata that the properties werehypothecated. With the utmost respect it results that the other proof in this reagrdwere not taken into consideration otherwise the conclusion would have been muchdifferent.
b) It results that Ronald Azzopardi was a debtor of MarioGalea Testaferrata and before the constitution of debt in the records ofMrgaret Heywood, there had passed various years during which Ronald Azzopardialways promised that he shall pay but he never honoured what hepromised..omissis.. It also results that the first time that the respondentBank was mentioned was on that day of the constitution of dent. Never beforehad the Bank APS been mentioned . The First time that the Bank was mntioned andits hypothecs was when the Notary was reading the contract before it was to bepublished. Furthermore it results to be accepted by everybodythat the Bank’shypothecs were not registered and for that reason the public searches on thecompany HD Holdings Ltd were in order or rather no debt, hypothc or enrolmentresulted against it. Infact nor did the loan result..omissis.. In the light ofthis the appellants ask how can it be considered ‘that Mario Galea Testaferrtawas ‘ informed’. And if he is to be considered as notified (which is not thecaee) can he be considered a party in fraud for the purpose of this action? Theappellants with the greatest humlitity uphold in the negative and that in thecircumstances the Court of First Instance could never impute fraud againstMario Galea Testaferata.
c) It is known that the element of fraud of the thirdparty in the actio mpauliana has to be proved only when the act which is beingimpugned is onerous. Such a necessity is intended only to safeguard the thirdparties in good faith as was Mario Galea Testaferrata in the case inexamination. It was upheld that the fraud of the third party was commonly knownas ‘partecipatio fraudis’ all takes place when the third party knows that he iscarrying out a juridical negotium which is of damage to the creditor’ It is notrequired that there be a fraudulent intention on the part of the third partybut it is necessary that there be the knowledge ‘ that he had of the state ofthe debtor that is the knowledge that the debtor was going to cause damage tothe creditor by his deed’ In the case in examination the only notice,information or knowledge which Mario Galea Testaferrata had was given to him atthe last minute verbally by Ronald Azzopardi or rather a person which could notbe reasonably believed anymore. Furthermore that information was contradictedby the official proof and documentation (the adjourned public searches) . Thusthe appellants submit that in actual fact Mario galea Testaferrata (although hewas informed by Ronald Azzopardi in that manner) he had no knowledge of thecreditior and his rights..omissis...Thus if there was neither knowledge of thecredit much less could there result the partecipatio fraudis on the part ofMario Galea Testaferata.In this regard the appellants refer to that submittedin their note of submissions.
III.The Third Grievance.
Wronginterpretation of the contract impugned-an onerous and not gratuitous contract.
a)The contract which is being attacked is a contract in the records of NotaryHeywood dated 25th February 2004 or rather a contract of constitution of debt.In virtue of this deed the defendant Ronald azzopardi acknowledged a debt infavour of Mario Galea Testaferrata, in the same contract there appeared thedefendant compay HD Holdings Ltd, to give a guarantee which guarantee was givenspecifically due to the money lent.In the same manner the hypothecs were givenas a guarantee for the onerous loan which Ronald Azzopardi took from MarioGalea Testaferata. Even here the repercussions of these hyopothecs on HDHoldings Ltd, in case of non obsevance were undoubtedly onerous.There is nodoubt that the effects of the constitution of debt in question especially incase of non obsevance were onerous.
b)Apart from this the constitution of debt is one act and although it containsvarious parts it constitutes one negotium..omissis..Thus there is no doubt thatthis is one contract and cannot be broken down as done by the Court of FirstInstasnce. The appellants are aggrieved by the fact that the Court of FirstInstance focussed on the aspect of the guarantee and dismembered it from therest of the contract and concluded that it is a gratuitous act. The guaranteewas onerous and this because the effects which it can leave once the contractis not obseved.
c)Thus once it is a contract which regulated the paying back of money lent andthe repercussions in case of default (and not a donation) there is no doubtthat it was onerous and not a gratuitous act there follows the element ofconsilium fraudis which has to result from the two contracting parties and notonly the debtor. The respondent bank had to prove that there subsisted fraudboth on the part of Ronald Azzopardi and on the part of Mario GaleaTestaferata. In the absence of the consilium fraudis, as required by law, theactiion cannot succeed.
IV.TheFourth Grievance.
Awrong application of the law. The demand for rescission and cancellation of thehypothecs of Mario Galea Testaferata is excessive and inadmissible.
a)If there results prejudice to the respondent bank it is not the case that thehypothecs of Mario Galea Testaferata be cancelled. The damages which therespondent bank shall suffer is that Mario GaleaTestaferrata shall rank beforesince his hypothecs were registered before those of the Bank (because the bankwas negligent and failed to register them on time. The hypothecs of Mario GaleaTestaferata are valid and should be given effect. Thus if it is considered thatthe said Bank had preferred hypothecary rights, the hypothecs of Mario Galeashould if ever rank after those of the Bank.If its granted but not concededthat the Bank was right the present action is justified and thus the prejudicesuffered be remedied the remedy should be that the bank’s hypothecs beconsidered to rank before those of Mario Galea Testaferratra and not those ofMario Galea Testaferrata be outrightly cancelled...omisis.. The cancellation ofthe hypothecs of Mario Galea Testaferrata is not necessary and goes beyond whatis reasonably justfied once the bank is truly granted a remedy.
b)It was established that the actio paluliana can be utilised to impugn part ofthe contract and not necessarily all the act. Thus what can be saved should besaved and the remedy should affect onlty the prejudicial part. Thus in the casein question if the prejudice lies in the fact that the hypothecs of theappellants presently rank before those of he respondent bank the remedy should bethat there is a change in the ranking in the sense that the Bank ranks beforethe appellants.
Thusthe appellants for the reasons above exposed whilst referring to all therecords of the proceedings in the cause in the names premised and reseving toproduce all the proof permissible law are humbly filing this humble appeal fromthe judgement of the First Hall Civil Court, of the 26th March 2015 in thenames premised and pray by means of this appeal that the Court uphold the pleasraised by the appellants, with costs of both instanceas against the otherrespondents in solidum.
Services:1. HD Holdings Limited- 61/1 Seamaid Court, Triq Sir Arturo Mercieca, Sliema.
2.Ronald Mercieca -61/1 Seamaid Court, Triq Sir Arturo Mercieca, Sliema.
3.Mariella Azzopardi - 15, Flat 6, Triq Ġużè Howard, Sliema.
4.Franco Azzopardi - as Company secretary of the Company HD Holdings Limited -Salina Park, Apt 5, Triq Andrew Cunnigham, Qawra.
Reġistryof the Superior Courts (Appeals), today 2nd October 2015.
ADV.FRANK PORTELLI, LLD.
Forthe Registrar, Civil Courts and Truibunals
Notice 1574
1574Bymeans of a decree of the 19th June 2015 of the Civil Court First Hall in therecords of judicial letter number 1276/15, in the names Architect Martin Xuerebvs Maria Victoria Tua et, the following publication was ordered for the purposeof effecting sevice on the respondent in terms of Article 187(3) of Cap. 12.
Inthe First Hall of the Civil Court
ToMaria Victoria Tua (ID 0656658M)and Richard Tua (ID 0440953M) of Palma Cottage, Tal-Palma, c/o Mġarr.
Bythe present Architect Martin Xuereb (ID 248654M) of Martin Xuereb &Associates, 33, Sir George Borg Street, Sliema, whilst refering to the workscarried out by him on the project consisting of the development of land intoflats in Triq il-Bajja, adjacent to Triq il-Kbira, San Ġiljan which includesapplication for the permit, formally solicit you so that you pay the sum of€33,789.39 representing the works done on your instructions with full knowledgeof the costs involved.
Althoughthe interpellant solicited you several times for payment, you remained indefault without any valid reason.
Indefault that you pay within the established time, further legal procedures willbe taken against you without further notice including the issuing of theopportune warrants.
Somuch of your own guidance and to proceed.
Thisjudicial letter is being made for all the effects and purposes of law includingand not limitedly the interaption of the prescription in terms of Cap. 12 andCap. 16 of the Laws of Malta.
Withcosts and interest and with resevation for any other further action accordingto law that the interpellant has against you.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1575
1575Bya decree of the Consumer Claims Tribunal of 16th September 2015, thepublication of the following extract was ordered for the purpose of sevice interms of Article 187(3) et seq of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure(Cap 12).
VincenzaAttard of Ċensina House, Triq id-Dejma, Fgura, filed a Claim on the 13thOctober 2014 whereby she asked the Tribunal to condemn John Darmanin carryingon trade under the name of Pajka Blacksmith of Natura Divina, Delimara Road,Marsaxlokk, to pay the plaintiff the sum of €1595 which amount is due to theplaintiff.
Thecase (CCT Number 76/15) is deferred on the 20th October 2015 at 1.00 p.m.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1576
1576Bya decree of the Consumer Claims Tribunal of 9th September 2015, the publicationof the following extract was ordered for the purpose of sevice in terms ofArticle 187(3) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap 12).
KatieGialanze of Marialourdes, Triq il-Kitarristi, Birzebbugia, filed a Claim on the3rd December 2014 whereby she asked the Tribunal to condemn Abdelsalam S SalemEl Hag Mohamed and Caroline El Hag Mohamed née Gatt of No 1, Miriam Flat, GħajndwieliRoad, Paola, to pay the plaintiff the sum of €3,500 which amount is due to theplaintiff.
Thecase (CCT Number 50/15) is deferred on the 4th November 2015 at 1.00 p.m.
ALEXANDRADEBATTISTA
Forthe Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals.
Notice 1577
1577Itis being notified that by a decree dated 30th September, 2015 given by theCourt of Magistrates (Gozo) as a Court of Criminal Inquiry (Magistrate DrJoseph Mifsud B.A. (Leg. & Int. Rel.), B.A. (Hons), M.A. (European), LL.D.,Preliminary Investigation number 112/2013 in the case: The Police (InspectorBernard Charles Spiteri) versus Jonathan Roger Portelli, 34 years of age, sonof Roger and of Antoinette née Debrincat, born in Victoria, Gozo, on the 3rdMay, 1982 and residing at ‘Highfields’, Ta’ Luvier Street, Munxar, Gozo(identity card number 32782G), ordered the attachment in the hands of thirdparties in general all monies and other moveable property due, or pertaining,or belonging to Jonathan Roger Portelli, and prohibits the said accused fromtransferring, pledging, hypothecating, or otherwise disposing of any moveableor immovable property in terms of Article 5 of the Prevention of MoneyLaundering Act, Cap. 373 of the Laws of Malta, and Article 23A (2) of theCriminal Code, Cap. 9 of the Laws of Malta. The Court in terms of the provisoto Article 5 (1) (b) of Cap. 373 of the Laws of Malta conceded the accused toreceive the amount of €13,976.24c per annum.
DR MARY DEBONO BORG LL.D.
RegistrarGozo Courts and Tribunals
Bann for Curators
1578Republicof Malta
ToThe Marshall of the Court.
Bymeans of a decree by this Court, on the 7th August 2015, following a request ofFimbank plc, it was ordered ordered that deputy curators be chosen to representthe absent Atilla Dogan, in the records of the judicial letter number2776/2015, hereunder brought forward, in the names Fimbank plc vs KuraturiDeputati and in the relative and subsequent acts.
Inthe First Hall Civil Court
Toi) Arex LLP 6TH Floor 32, Ludgate Hill, London, United Kingdom.
ii)Deputy Curators to represent the absent Atilla Dogan (passport number U05067748) with an address Arayoloud Flora, Evlert Fulyo Blk D, 37, Atasehir,Istanbul, Turkey.
iii)Deputy Curators to represent the absent Suheyla Dogan (passport number U01523679) with an address Arayoloud Flora, Evlert Fulyo Blk D, 37, Atasehir,Istasnbul, Turkey.
iv)Deputy Curators to represent the absent companmy A.S.D. Enerji MadencilikPetrol Urunleri Sanayi ve Dis Ticaret Anonim Sirketi, with an address KayisdagiCaddesi Bilgi, Plaza No 111, Kat 4, Daire 8, Kucukbakkalkoy –Kadikoy, Istanbul,Turkey.
Bymeans of the present judicial letter FIM Bank p.l.c. (C 17003) refers to theagreement of the 30th May 2013, between the interpellant company and thecompany Arex LLP by means of which Arex LLP was granted a banking facilityconsisting in Uncommitted Revolving Import Trade Finance Facility assubsequently amended on the 30th November 2014, on the 22nd December 2014 andthe 10th May 2015 (the facility).
FimBankp.l.c. refers also to the agreements between (i) itself and Attilla Dogan and SuheylaDogan, on the 30th May 2014, whereby Attilla Dogan and Suheyla Dogan,constituted themselves as sureties in solidum together with Arex LLP for therepayment of any unsettled debt that there might be in terms of the Facilityand (ii) between FIMBank p.l.c. and A.S.D. Enerji Madencilik Petrol UrunleriSanayi ve Dis Ticaret Anonim Sirketi Kayasdagi Caddedssi Bilgi (A.S.D.) of the30th May 2014, whereby A.S.D. constituted itself a surety in solidum of ArexLLP for the repayment of any debt which is not settled in terms of theFacility.
Thatit results that Arex LLP failed its contractual obligations and did not pay theoutstanding debts due in terms of the Facility. On the 16th July 2015, theinterpellant company sent a Notice of Default to Arex LLP whereby it requestedthe company to pay the amount of USD 602,007.70 equivalent to € 544,819.06according to the rate of exchange of 1.1070 due in terms of the Facility.Another letter was sent to the respondents Dogan as well to A.S.D. asguarantors of the debt wherein they were asked to pay the debt due to FIMBANKp.l.c.
On this basis, Arex LLP, Atilla Dogan, Suheyla Dogan andA.S.D. are joint and several debtors of the interpellant company in the amountof USD 602,007.70 equivalent to €544,819.06 according to the rate of exchange1.1070 besides interest.Owing to the fact that up to the filing of this letterno payment has been made notwithastanding a number of requests for payment,FIMBank p.l.c . formally calls upon you so that within three days from the datewhen you recieve this letter you pay the amount of USD 602,007.70 equivalent to€ 544,819.06 according to the rate of exchange of 1.1070. In the event offailure from your sen to effect such payment FIMBank will proceed judiciallyagainst you without any further notice.
Youmay be guided accordingly.
Withcosts and interests applicable according to the facility.
Interpellantcompany: FimBank p.l.c. Mercury Tower, The Exchange Financial & BusinessCentre, Elia Zammit Street, St. Julians, STJ 3155.
Respondents:i) 6th Floor, 32, Ludgate Hill, London, United Kingdom.
ii)Deputy Curators.
iii)DeputyCurators.
iv)Deputy Curators.
Youare therefore ordered to affix an official copy of this bann at the entrance ofthis Superior Court and to summon whosoever wishes to act as curator to appearbefore this Registry within six days and by means of a minute to submit adeclaration that he wishes so to act.
Youare also ordered to inform each one that if he fails to make this declarationwithin the stipulated time, the Court will proceed to the selection of Curatorsof Office.
Andafter so acting or if you ahould encounter any difficulty in the execution ofthis bann, you are to inform forthwith this Court.
Givenby the Civil Court First Hall, above mentioned, with the witness of the Hon.Mr. Justice Anthony Ellul LLD, Doctor of Laws.
ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD
Forthe Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals.
Notice 1579
1579By means of a decree given, on the 9th July 2015, by theFirst Hall Civil Court, in the records of the Sworn Application in the namesGatt Joseph et vs Advvocate Renzo Porsella Flores et nomine, application number173/12 JPG, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of NazzarenzaZammit, in terms of article 187(3) et seq. of Cap 12.
Bymeans of a Sworn Application, filed, in the First Hall Civil Court, in thenames Joseph Gatt (ID 172168M) and his wife Josephine Anne sive Josianne Gatt(ID 571177M) vs Dr. Renzo Porsella Flores and Legal Procurator MadeleineFirman, by decree of the 6th March 2012, were appointed Deputy Curators, toappear in the name of the vacant inheritance of Maria Borg (ID 481828M) and bydecree of the 9th July 2015, Nazzarenza Zammit, was called into the suit, onthe 20th February 2012, the applicant Joseph and Josianne Gatt, asked thisHonourable Court;
1.to condemn the defendants nomine so that in fulfilment of the promise of salethey come forward to the formation and publication of the contract to sell tothe plaintiffs the grave with number thirty eight (38) section B, in theĊimiteru tar-Risurrezzjoni, in Valletta Road, Ħal Qormi, towards the price andthe pacts stipulated in the preliminary agreement and uphold the other demandsin the application.
Notify:Nazzarenza Zammit, 6, Triq San Pietru, Qormi.
TheSworn Application in the names Gatt Joseph et vs Advocate Renzo Porsella Floreset nomine, application number 173/12 JPG, has been deferred for hearing to the14th October 2015, to the 12.15 p.m.
AVV.FRANK PORTELLI, LLD.
Forthe Reġistrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 1580
1580Bya decree of the 13th April, 2015 given by the Court of the Magistrates, theCourt ordered that the extract hereunder mentioned be published for the purposeof service according to article 187(3) of the Code of Organization and CivilProcedure (Chapter 12).
Thatby the application filed by Vodafone Malta Ltd on 30th October 2014 is askingfor the withdrawal of the amount of €1277.26 deposited by the Schedule ofDeposit number 2656/12 in the names of:
VodafoneMalta Ltd (C 10865) vs Ultima Nails Ltd (C 36357)
TheCourt ordered the notification of this application with two days to file areply.
MARVICFARRUGIA
ForRegistrar of Courts and Civil Tribunals
Bann for Curators
1581Republicof Malta
ToThe Marshall of the Court.
Bymeans of a decree by the First Hall Civil Court, on the 15th September 2015,following a request of HSBC Bank Malta plc, it was ordered that deputy curatorsbe chosen to represent the absent David Azzopardi, in the records of theJudicial Sale number 41/2015, in the names HSBC Bank Malta vs deputy curatorsand in the relative and subsequent acts.
Thatby means of an Application, presented, in the First Hall Civil Court, in thenames HSBC Bank Malta p.l.c. (C 3177) vs David Azzopardi (ID 223680M) on the8th July 2015, application for a Warrant of Seizure on immovable property ofthe company HSBC Bank Malta p.l.c. the applicant HSBC Bank Malta p.l.c.respectfully premised and asked;
Thatby means of a contract of loan and sale, dated 19th May 2006, of Notary DoctorIan Castaldi Paris and rendered executive by means of a judicial letter of the27th April 2012, the applicant company was confirmed a creditor of therespondent in the sum of (€107,057.96) besides legal interest from the 2ndApril 2012, till the date of effective payment.
Thatalthough the respondent was duly called to pay his debt by means of the abovementioned judicial letter he remained in default.
Thatamongst the immovable property of the respondent there is the premises numbertwo (2) Triq Santa Marija, Ħamrun, free and unencumbered, with all its rightsand appurtenances, thus the applicant company prays that this Honourable Courtorder the issuing of the executive warrant by ordering the judicial sale andfix a day, time and place for the sale of the property mentioned.
Notify:Anthony Azzopardi, 773, Triq il-Kbira, Ħamrun.
Youare therefore ordered to affix an official copy of this bann at the entrance ofthis Superior Court and to summon whosoever wishes to act as curator to appearbefore this Registry within six days and by means of a minute to submit adeclaration that he wishes so to act.
Youare also ordered to inform each one that if he fails to make this declarationwithin the stipulated time, the Court will proceed to the selection of Curatorsof Office.
Andafter so acting or if you ahould encounter any difficulty in the execution ofthis bann, you are to inform forthwith this Court.
Givenby the Civil Court First Hall, above mentioned, with the witness of the Hon.Madam Justice Lorraine Schembri Orland, LLD, Doctor of Laws.
ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD
For the Registrar, Civil Courts andTribunals