Mur Lura
Court Notices published in Govt. Gazette No. 19,782 of 19 May 2017
01/01/2017
Bann for Curators
808Republic of Malta
To the Marshall of the Court
By means of a decree by this Court, on the 26th April,2017, following a request of Adv. Peter Fenech noe, it was ordered that deputycurators be chosen to represent the absent consegnatary Al Khebra ShippingCompany, in the records of the application number 370/17 MCH, in the names Adv.Peter Fenech vs Deputy Curators and in the other relative and subsequent acts.
By means of an Application, filed, in the First HallCivil Court, in the names Adv Peter Fenech as special mandatary of the foreigncompany Nokia Corporation of Karaportti 3, 02610, Espoo, Finland vs Deputycurators to represent the absent consegnetary AL Khebra Shipping Company ofEstihmar Amwal AL Muntagenn Building, Second Floor –Office No 216, Misurata,Libya, on the 25th April 2017, the applicant nomine humbly asked thisHonourable Court:
1. To declare that the objects consisting in twentyeight thousand (28,000) batteries for cellular telephones all with theregistered marks of Nokia Corporation on which there are registered as wordmarks ‘NOKIA’ in the National Register of Trademarks, on the 18th October 2001,with registration number TM33323 and TM33324 respectively (Doc N1 and N2respectively) as well as the ownership of the rights registered as trademarksof the European Union (EUTM) with the office of Intellectual Property of theEuropean Union (EUIPO) namely the word mark ‘NOKIA’ with registration number004035663 dated 3rd January, 2006, as well as the figurative mark ‘Nokia’ withregistration number 014941793 dated 13th June, 2016, which are presently heldunder the authority of the Comptroller of Customs , after he had suspended therelease of the container number APHU6478539 containing the said merchandise arecounterfeit and contravene the rights of intellectual property of the applicantcompany;
2. Order the Comptroller of Customs to dispose of thesaid merchandise outside the chanels of commerce in such a manner as topreclule any damage to the applicant company and the public consumer or orderthe Comptroller of Customs to destroy the said merchandise in any case withoutany compensation and at the expense of the respondents;
3. Order that the respondents are to bear all theexpenses conncected with the measures ordered in terms of the second (2) andthird (3) demands of the applicants including those of transport of the saidmerchandise for storage in Malta, before their eventual destruction , of thestorage of the same, of the tallying and all the expenses due to the Comptollerof Customs, from the begining of these procedures and the other expensesdemanded in the application.
With costs, against the respondents from now summonedso that a reference to their evidence be made.
List of Witnesses
List of Documents
Notify: Applicant: 36, Triq l-Arċisqof, Valletta VLT1447
DeputyCurators, Courts of Justice, Valletta
You are therefore ordered to affix an official copy ofthis bann at the entrance of this Superior Court and to summon whosoever wishesto act as curator to appear before this Registry within six days and by meansof a minute to submit a declaration that he wishes so to act.
You are also ordered to inform each one that if hefails to make this declaration within the stipulated time, the Court willproceed to the selection of Curators of Office.
And after so acting or if you ahould encounter anydifficulty in the execution of this bann, you are to inform forthwith thisCourt.
Given by 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
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 809
809By means of a decree given, b y the Court of Appeal,on the 10th April, 2017, in the records of the Appeal Application, in the namesBank of Valletta, plc (C 2833) vs Willsmart Limited (C 26279) et. Applicationnumber 152/09 SM, the following publication was ordered for the purpose ofservice of the respondents Willsmart Limited, Alfred and Marlene spousesWilliams and Dunstan Williams, in terms of Article 187(3) et seq. of Cap. 12.
By means of an Appeal Application, filed, in the Courtof Appeal, Writ of Summons number 152/09 SM, in the names Bank of Valletta plc(C 2833) vs 1)Willsmart Limited (C 26279), and 2) Alfred and Marlene spousesWilliams (ID 581651M) and 462348M) and according to a decree dated 2ndDecember, 2009, there intervened in the cause Dunstan Williams (ID 102779M) onthe 22nd December, 2016, the applicant appellant company Bank of Valletta plc(C 2933) respectfully pleaded:
1. That by means of its Sworn Application, filed, onthe 18th February, 2009, the applicant company premised,
That by means of two contracts dated 18th August 2000,in the records of Notary Doctor Joseph Henry Saydon, it granted bankingfacilities to the respondent company,
That the respondent company is thus a debtor of theapplicant bank in the amount of one hundred fifty one thousand eight hundredeighty six euro and twenty cents (€151,886.20) balance for ‘Loan and OverdraftAccounts’ of the respondent company with the applicant Bank, together withinterest from the 27th September, 2008,
That the respondents Alfred and Marlene spousesWilliams, in solidum with the respondent company guaranteed the debts of thesame company and this as appears from the same two contracts above indicateddated 18th August, 2000,
That there occurred one or more of the eventsmentioned in the same contracts above referred to as described in the sameoriginal application,
That the respondents duly called upon to pay remainedin default,
That thus the appellant company called upon this Courtso that the respondents shall have the opportunity to state why this Courtshould not,
… omissis …
With costs, as brought forward in the originalapplication against the same respondents and saving the other claims of theapplicant Bank against the respondents spouses Williams;
2. That by means of the sworn reply dated 26th June2009, the respondents replied in the following manner to the demands of theapplicant Bank;
… omissis …
3. That by means of the same sworn reply therespondent company, availed itself from the same and filed the followinghcounterclaims to the same after premising the following:
i) That on the 14th July, 2000, the counterclaimedapplicant Bank (from now on called the applicant Bank) accepted to grantbanking facilities to the respondent company in the global sum of one hundredseventy four thousand seven hundred and three euro (€ 174,703) divided inOverdraft and Loan as indicated in the same counterclaim,
ii) That the applicant Bank bound the counterclaimingcompany (from now called the respondent compant) to produce the guaranteesthere also indicated,
iii) .… omissis …,
iv) That on the12 th July, 2002, the respondentcompany accepted to grant on loan to Dunstan Williams, the amount of forty sixthousand five hundred eight seven euro and seventy seven cents (€46,587.77),
v) That for this purpose it bound Dunstan Williams toeffect the guarantees therein indicated,
vi) … omissis …,
vii) … omissis …,
viii) That on his part Dunstan Williams was payingregularly,
ix) That in March 2003, Alfred Williams was arrestedand charged in Court accused with fraud and misappropriation to the rights ofthe applicant Bank,
x) That it did not appear that there was anyallegation against the respondent company and of Dunstan Wiliams,
xi.) That the only connection in this regard was thatAlfred and his wife were sureties of the respondent company,
xii) … omissis …,
xiii) … omissis …,
xiv) That on the 30th January, 2003, Dunstan Williamswas given a sanction letter by thr applicant Bank, which indicated that he hadbeen given three hundred fifty eight thousand four hundred thirty six euro andsixty three cents, (€358,436.63), which loan in fact was never asked for,
xv) As a result of the same the applicant Bankparalysed the commercial activity of Dunstan Williams,
xvi) … omissis …,
xvii)That the applicant Bank is making undue andabusive pressure on the respondent company in order that it guarantees the debtof the respondent Alfred Williams,
That thus the defendant respondent company availeditself of this procedure to file the following counterclaim to ask the Courtwhy it should not:
a) Declare the applicant Bank responsible for damagescaused to the respondent company as a result of the action of the same Bankabove described,
b)Liquidate the damages suffered by the respondentcompany, if necessary with the work of referees to be appointed,
c) Condemn the same applicant bank to pay the damagesso liquidated to the respondent company.
With costs and interest against the applicant Bank;
4. That by means of the reply of the samecounterclaimed applicant Bank of the 15th July, 2009, the applicant companypleaded the following:
i) That the counterclaiming demands are irregular,null and inadmissible since the respondent company is not indicating what typeof responsibility it is attributing to the applicant Bank,
ii) … omissis …,
iii)… omissis …,
iv)… omissis …,
v) That the applicant Bank acted within the terms ofthe contractual relationship there is between the parties and thus caused nodamages against the respondent company,
vi) … omissis …,
vii) … omissis …;
5.That by means of a decree ofthis Court, differently presided dated 9th March, 2010 , by means of which itupheld the demand contained in the application dated 19th August, 2009, andauthorised Dunstan Williams to intervene in the records of this procedure withthe modality therein indicated,
That by means of a reply of the intervenor in thecause Dunstan Williams which bears the date of the 22nd March, 2010, the sameintervenor in the cause pleaded the following:
i) That he associates himself with the reply of therespondent company,
ii) … omissis …,
iii) … omissis …,
iv) Saving further replies.
That the same intervenor availed himself of thisprocedure and filed the following counterclaim where he briefly pleaded thefollowing,
That for the sake of the economy of the proceedings itis stated only that he makes ample reference to the facts as exposed by therespondent company in its counterclaim,
That in view of the same he asks this Court to statewhy it should not:
i) Declare the applicant Bank responsible for thedamages caused to him,
ii) Liquidate the damages the damages suffered by therespondent company,
iii) Condemn the same applicant Bank to pay the damagesso liquidated to the same intervenor.
With costs and legal interests against the applicantBank;
6. That by means of a sworn reply of the applicantBank, dated 7th April, 2010, to the counterclaims of the intervenor aboveindicated, in brief the following is stated:
i) That the same demands are null, irregular,inadmissible and cannot be upheld,
ii) That the intervenor de quo does not have ajuridical interest in this cause,
iii) … omissis …,
iv.That any loss that the intervenor could have sufferedis imputable only to him and to the respondent company;
7. That by means of a Note of the applicant Bank dated27th May, 2010, the Bank waived its demands as brought in the original swornaplication, but held firm the demand for the costs;
8. That by means of a judgement given by theHonourable First Hall Civil Court, on the 17th November, 2016, that Courtdecided that,
In view of the above it results thay the respondentcompany did not approve its demands as demanded in its counterclaim and consequently:
i) It upholds the replies of the counterclaimedapplicant Bank,
ii) Rebutts all the demands of the counterclaimingrespondent company,
iii) Rebutts the demands contained in the counterclaimof the intervenor in the cause as illegitiamtely filed and thus null,
iv) With costs of this procedure against therespondents above referred to;
9.That by means of an application, filed, on the 29thNovember, 2016, before the Honourable First Hall Civil Court, in terms ofArticle 235 of Cap 12 of the Laws the applicant premised,
That when the Honourable First Court, decided andupheld ‘ with the costs of this procedure against the respondents abovereferred to it was referring only to the cost of the counterclaim instituted bythe defendant company and not also … omissis … and thus the applicant humblyasked that Honourable Court in terms of Article 235 of Cap. 12 of the Laws ofMalta to decide on:
i) The head of costs of the cause relative to thedemands of the applicant company against the defendants as filed in theoriginal sworn application of this cause, and
ii) The head of costs of the counterclaim stituted bythe intervenor in the cause Dunstan Williams,
That by means of a Deceee given by the HonourableCourt, on 5th December, 2016, that Court, decided that after having seen theapplication of the 29th November 2016 and having also seen Article 235 of Cap12 of the Laws of Malta,’In the light of the application above referred toupholds the demands therein included’,
That with all respect the interpellant felt aggrievedwith the same judgement of the 17th November, 2016, and by the decree of the5th December, 2016, following its application of the 29th November, 2016,because in the humble opinion of the interpellant, the Honourable First Courtdid not decide in virtue of the said judgement,and by the same decree of the5th December, 2016, how the head of costs of the cause instituted by the Bank,are to be partitioned and the head of costs of the cause instituted by therespondent Dunstan Williams are to be partitioned.
That in the humble submission of the interpellant oncethe claim indicated in the demand in the cause instituted by the Bank againstthe respondents was paid during these proceedings, as results from the recordsit follows that the costs of the main cause instituted by the appellantplaintiff bank, be borne by the defendants Willsmart Limited and Alfred andMarlene spouses Williams;
… omissis …
10. That subordinately and without prejudice once theHonourable First Court, rebutted all the demands of the intervenor in the causetoday the respondent Dunstan Williams, as legitimately filed, are null, thecosts of the said countrerclaim had to be borne by the same respondent DunstanWilliams,
That the interpellant points that although the HonourableFirst Court, in its decree of the 5th December, 2016, appeared to be agreeingwith the submissions of the interpellant, what it decided by its same decree isonly that ‘it upholds’ the demand when this demand was solely so that ‘in termsof article 235 of Cap. 12 of the Laws, to decide about the costs’.
… omissis …
Thus, the interpellant had to file this humble Appeal,limitedly as regards the head of costs as regards the demands of the applicantcompany, against the defendant respondents and as regards the costs of thecounterclaim instituted by the respondent Dunstan Williams.
Thus, the interpellant whilst referring to the proofproduced and producible as this stage humbly prays that this Honourable Courtreforms the judgement given by the Honourable First Court, on the 17thNovember, 2016, and its decree of the 5th December, 2016, following theapplication of the interpellant of the 29th November, 2016, by confirming andvarying the same judgement as demanded in this application and confirm any varythe Decree of the 5th December, 2016, as demanded in this application.
With costs of this procedure agasinst all therespondents.
Interpellant company: Bank of Valletta plc (C 2833)1/5, Misraħ San Ġorġ, Valletta VLT 1190
Respondents: 1) Willsmart Limited, c/o 93, Triqil-Belvedere, Qala, Gozo
2) Alfred and Marlene Williams, 81, Redlene, VictoryStreet,Senglea
3) Dunstan Williams, c/o 93, Triq Belvedere, Qala,Gozo
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Reġistrar, Civil courts and Tribunals
Notice 810
810By means of a decree, given, by the Civil Court(Family Section) given on the 4th May, 2017, in the records of the Divorce inthe names Chircop Maria Stella sive Stella vs Bel Haj Amor Heikel, Applicationnumber 122/17 AL, the following publication was ordered for the purpose ofservice of the defendant Heikel Bel Haj Amor, in terms of Article 187(3) etseq. of Cap. 12.
By means of an Application, filed, in the Civil Court(Family Section) in the names Maria Tella sive Stella Chircop (ID 0098587M) vsHeikel Bel Haj Amor (ID 27036A) on the 28th March, 2017, the applicant MariaStella sive Stella Chircop, asked this Honourable Court,
1. To pronounce the divorce between the parties interms of Article 66B of Cap 16 of the Laws of Malta, and uphold the otherdemands in the application.
Defendant; 88F, Vivianne Flats, Apt 3, Triq Rudolfu,Tas-Sliema
The Sworn Application in thenames Chircop Maria Stella sive Stella vs Bel Haj Amor Heikel, applicationnumber 122/17 AL, has been deferred to the 31st May, 2017, at 9.15 a.m.
Reġistry of the Civil Courts(Family Section), today16th May, 2017
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 811
811DKR 161/2012 – Cancellation of a Freezing Order
It is being notified that by a decree dated 08th May,2017, given by the Court of Criminal Appeal(Madame Justice Dr Edwina Grima, LLD), after an application filed bySusan Callus on the 28th April, 2017, Compilation number 524/2012 in the case:
The Police
(Inspector Antonovich Muscat)
Versus
Sharon Camilleri
and
Giuseppe Cutajar
The Court revoked the freezing order imposed on thelate Guiseppe Cutajar and authorized the release of all the assets belonging tothe decujus Giuseppe Cutajar who died on the 12th December, 2012, in favour ofthe said Susan Callus.
The publication of this order is being published interms of Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act Cap. 373 of theLaws of Malta, and of Section 23A of the Criminal Code, Cap. 9 of the Laws ofMalta, following a freezing order which was published in the Government Gazetteof the 18th May, 2012, after a decree from the Court of Magistrates (Malta) asa Court of Criminal Inquiry on the 16th May, 2012, where the Court ordered theattachment in the hands of third parties in a general manner, all monies andother movable and immovable property which may be due to or belonging to SharonCamilleri and Giuseppe Cutajar.
Dr John Seychell Navarro
Dip. Hlth Science, Dip. MgmtStud., Dip. Not. Pub., LLB, LLD
Assistant Registrar Criminal Courts and Tribunals
Notice 812
812By decree given by the Civil Court, First Hall on 8thMay, 2017, on the application of A. Gatt Trading Limited (C 23814), Wednesday,28th June, 2017, at ten in the morning (10.00 a.m.) has been fixed for the saleby auction, to be held at J & J Boatyard, Triq l-Għadmija, L-Imqabba, ofthe following items seized from the property of Kaplan Sadik (ID 46115A).
Ten (10) cane tables and forty(40) cane chairs, television of the make Samsung, three (3) fridge counters,stainless steel tables, kebab grills, food warmer of the make Tuman Gelih, chippan of the make Tuman Gelih, chip warmer of the make Tuman Gelih, stainlesssteel fridge of the make Olis, stainless steel fridge of the make Ilsa andother various objects.
N.B. The said objects will be sold as described in theacts of judicial sale file number 5/17.
Marvic Farrugia
For the Registrar of Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 813
813By decree given by the Civil Court, First Hall on 26thApril, 2017, on the application of Festa Limited (C 799), Wednesday, 5th July,2017, at half past ten in the morning (10.30 a.m.), has been fixed for the saleby auction, to be held in Euroconcrete Limited, Wied Inċita, Triq ir-Rabat,Ħ’Attard, of the following items seized from the property of Aquilina Marc proet.
Truck AEC with the registration number IBC 258,generator Swan yellow in colour and forklifter Boss yellow in colour Model RH30D/5A-2.
N.B. The said objects will be sold as described in thefile number 20/13.
Marvic Farrugia
For the Registrar of Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 814
814By a decree given on the 30th March, 2015, by theCivil Court First Hall, the Court ordered that the extract hereunder mentionedbe published for the purpose of service according to Article 187 (3) of theCode of Organization and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).
By decree given by the Civil Court, First Hall on 24thFebruary, 2017, on the application of Simonds Farsons Cisk plc (C 113),Tuesday, 6th June, 2017, at half past ten in the morning (10.30 a.m.), has beenfixed for the sale by auction, to be held on the First Floor of these Courts ofJustice, Triq ir-Repubblika, Valletta, of the following property:
1. Apartment internally marked number three (3)without its airspace, in third floor (2nd floor) and forming part from a blockof apartment’s number forty (40) in Triq Vincenzo Bugeja, Ħamrun. Includingwith this apartment the right to use perpetually or not interrupted proportionwith the other apartments in the same block of the common parts and commonservices, including the entrance door, the entrance hall, the stairs, thelanding, the lift and the lift shaft, drains and the drainage system as well asthe use of the roof and washroom located at the rear back of the same block.This apartment is overlying on property of Victor and Josette Chircop or theirsuccessors in title and underlying property of Patrick and Carmen spousesCaruana or their successors in title valued at one hundred and twenty thousandeuro (€120,000).
2. Garage without its airspace, internally markednumber thirty (30) situated on basement level forming part of a block of thirtyone (31) garages built on two levels and cioè in basement and in the firstlevel are accessibly from a ramp and drive in Triq Annunzjata in Santa Venerasometimes they refer to the same road that is situated in Ħamrun. Includingwith this garage is the right of passage and use together in common with theother tenants of the garages situtated in the complex including the ramp andthe drive in and common passage. Including also the use of the common well withthe other tenants of the garages in the complex and the right of the footpassage in the Alley that reaches from Triq Santu Wistin until this complex.The garages that are in this complex were built on a site which previously wasbuilt tenement number eleven (11) and named ‘Sundor’ in Triq Annunzjata, Ħamrun,bound on North, West and East with property of D. M. Developments Limited orsuccessor in title or more accurate boundaries. The said property enjoys theright active and passive servitudes resulting from its relative position, therest is free from any ground rent with all its rights and appurtenances valuedat twenty thousand euro (€20,000).
3. Apartment on the second floor internally markednumber two (2) forming part from a complex of apartments number thirty one (31)name ‘St Joseph’ in Triq Wilġa, Paceville, in St Julians, subject to annual andperpetual ground rent of twenty three euro and thirty cents (€23.30) and itsrights from servitudes resulting from its relative position, the rest is freeand unencumbered with all its rights and appurtenances valued at one hundredand thirty euro (€130,000).
The said tenement is the property of Ian Chircop Beck(ID 64586M), Sherif Said Mohammed Osma Al-Sherif (ID 47714A), SveltanaAl-Sherif (ID168285M), A. Baran Limited (C 39371), Engin Turk (ID80811L), uRita Turk (ID 75269M).
N.B. The said tenement will be sold as described inacts of judicial sale file number 53/14.
Marvic Farrugia
For the Registrar of Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 815
815By means of a decree given, by the Civil Court (FamilySection) given on the 26th April, 2017, in the records of the Sworn Applicationin the names Agius Shawn vs Farrugia Scisanne, Application Number 39/17 AL, thefollwing publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the defendantScisanne Farrugia, in terms of Article 187(3) et. seq. of Cap. 12.
By means of a Sworn Application, filed, in the CivilCourt (Family Section) in the names Shawn Agius (ID 63189M) vs ScisanneFarrugia (ID 378598M) on the 16th February, 2017, the applicant Shawn Agius (ID63189M) after having premised that he was in a relationship with the respondentScisanne Farrugia (ID 378598M) and from which the hereunder mentioned minor wasborn, he asked the respondent Scisanne Farrugia, to state why this HonourableCourt should not saving any order that this Honourable Court may give,
1. Order that the care and custody of the minor…omissis… , should be entrusted exclusively to the applicant Shawn Agius, orderthe respondent to pay the applicant father, maintenance for the minor asdemanded in the application.
With costs, against the respondent from now summonedso that a reference to her evidence be made.
Applicant: Block B, Flat 7, Housing Estate, Fuqtal-Blat, Ħal Qormi
Respondent: 12, Triq Patri G. Spiteri Fremond, ĦalQormi
The Sworn Application in the names Agius Shawn vsFarrugia Scisanne, Application number 39/17 AL, was deferred for hearing toWednesday 21st June, 2017, at 9.15 a.m.
Reġistry of the Civil Courts (Family Section) today17th May, 2017
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Bann for Curators
816Republic of Malta
To the Court Marshall
By means of a decree given by this Court, on the 25thJanuary, 2017, following a request of Alexie Lapira, it was ordered that deputycurators be chosen to represent Cut Coiffeur Company Limited and David Bajada,in the records of the Application 73/2017, LSO, in the names Alexie Lapira vsDeputy Curators, and in the relative and subsequent acts.
That by means of an Application, filed, in the FirstHall Civil Court, in the names Alexie Lapira vs Deputy Curators for the companynot represented Cut Coiffeur Company Limited and David Bajada, on the 24thJanuary, 2017, the applicantAlexie Lapira (ID 515780M) respectfully pleaded,
That together with the present he filed an applicationin terms of Article 214 of the Companies Act and this even against therespondent company Cut Coiffeur Company Limited and the respondent David Bajada.
That as results from the document attached with thisapplication ‘Doc ALX’ the said company does not have appointed directors anddoes not have other officials.
Thus, the interpellant prays that this HonourableCourt appoint deputy curators for the respondent company Cut Coiffeur CompanyLimited in terms of Article 929 (d) of Cap. 12.
Interpellant: Aripal, Triq il-Gallina, Kappara, San Ġwann
Notification with the Banns: David Bajada, 200,il-Palazzin, Triq l-Imsida, Birkirkara
You are thus ordered to fix a copy of the bann at theentrance of this Superior Court and to summon whosoever wishes to act ascurator to appear before this Registry within six days and by means of a minuteto submit a declaration that he wishes so to act.
You are also ordered to inform each one that if hefails to make this declaration within the stipulated time, the Court willproceed to the selection of Curators of Office.
And after so acting or if you should encounter anydifficulty in the execution of this bann, you are to inform forthwith thisCourt.
Given by the Civil Court First Hall,abovementioned,with the witness of the Hon. Madam Justice Anna Felice, LLD, Doctorof Laws.
Adv. Frank Portelli, LLD
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 817
817Notice, Registry of the Civil Court (Family Section)
Whereas the plaintiff Anna Rita Buhagiar (ID 53184M)filed an application under oath (No. 113/17RGM) demanding Corrections in theAct Of Birth of the minor child Dyan Buhagair number 331/2016, in the PublicRegistry.
Whosoever may have an interest therein, and wishes tooppose that demand, is hereby called upon to do so, by means of a note to befiled in the Registry of these Courts, within fifteen days from the day of thepublication of this present notice in the Government Gazette.
Those who, within the aforesaid time, shall have filedsuch note, shall be notified by the service of a copy of the said applicationunder oath, of the day which will be appointed for the hearing of the case.
By order of the Court
Karen Falzon
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals
Notice 818
818It is hereby notified that by anapplication filed in the Court of Magistrates (Gozo) Voluntary Jurisdiction onthe 10th of May, 2017 (Application number 30/2017JVC) Carmela Agius et requestedthe opening of the Succession of Teresa Attard, spinster, daughter of the lateGiuseppe Attard and Maria Attard née Stellini, born and who used to reside in Żebbuġ,Gozo, and who died in Victoria, Gozo, on the 1st of January two thousand andfifteen (2015), intestate, and which opening of succession is to be made infavour of the applicant Carmela Agius, daughter of Maria Antonia Tabone, whodied on the 28th December 1983, the latter being the sister of the deceasedTeresa Attard, and this in the share of one twentieth (1/20) undivided shareper capita; the applicant Anthony Cassar, son of the late Maria Assunta Cassarnée Attard who died on the 14th February, 1991, the latter being the sister ofthe deceased Teresa Attard, and this in the share of one twentieth (1/20)undivided share per capita; the applicant Salvina Zammit daughter of the lateMaria Assunta Cassar née Attard who died on the 14th February, 1991, the latterbeing the sister of the deceased Teresa Attard, and this in the share of onetwentieth (1/20) undivided share per capita; the applicant Josef Buttigieg,Ivan Buttigieg and Helen Cassar children of the late Maria Assunta Cassar néeAttard who died on the 14th February, 1991, the latter being the sister ofTeresa Attard, and this in the share of one twentieth (1/20) undivided sharebetween them per stirpes; the applicant Carmelo Attard, son of Francesco Attardwho died on the 16th May, 2004, the latter being the brother of Teresa Attard,and this in the share of one twentieth (1/20) undivided share per capita; theapplicant George Attard, son of Francesco Attard who died on the 16th May,2004, the latter being the brother of Teresa Attard, and this in the share ofone twentieth (1/20) undivided share per capita; the applicant Maria Vella,daughter of Francesco Attard, who died on the 16th May, 2004, the latter beingthe brother of Teresa Attard, and this in the share of one twentieth (1/20)undivided share per capita; the applicant Alfred Attard son of FrancescoAttard, who died on the 16th May, 2004, the latter being the brother of TeresaAttard, and this in the share of one twentieth (1/20) undivided share percapita; the applicant Joseph Attard son of Francesco Attard, who died on the16th May, 2004, the latter being the brother of Teresa Attard, and this in theshare of one twentieth (1/20) undivided share per capita; the applicant BaskalAttard, son of Fortunato Attard who died on the 3rd November, 2005, the latterbeing the brother of Teresa Attard, and this in the share of one twentieth(1/20) undivided share per capita; the applicant Michael Attard son ofFortunato Attard who died on the 3rd November, 2005, the latter being thebrother of Teresa Attard, and this in the share of one twentieth (1/20)undivided share per capita; the applicant Maria Cini, daughter of FortunatoAttard who died on the 3rd November, 2005, the latter being the brother ofTeresa Attard, and this in the share of one twentieth (1/20) undivided shareper capita; the applicant Anthony Camilleri, son of Carmela Camilleri néeAttard, who died on the 24th July, 2007, the latter being the sister of TeresaAttard, and this in the share of one twentieth (1/20) undivided share percapita; the applicant Theresa Xuereb, daughter of Carmela Camilleri née Attard,who died on the 24th July, 2007, the latter being the sister of Teresa Attard,and this in the share of one twentieth (1/20) undivided share per capita; theapplicant Lucia Vella, daughter of Carmela Camilleri née Attard, who died onthe 24th July, 2007, the latter being the sister of Teresa Attard, and this inthe share of one twentieth (1/20) undivided share per capita; the applicantDominic Camilleri, Ronnie Camilleri and Noel Camilleri chidren of JosephCamilleri who died on the 6th September, 2004, the latter being the son ofCarmela Camilleri née Attard who died on the 24th July, 2007, and whom thelatter is the sister of Teresa Attard, and this in the share of one twentieth(1/20) undivided share between them per stirpes; the applicant George Formosa,son of Rita Formosa who died on the 3rd April, 2009, the latter being thesister of Teresa Attard, and this in the share of one twentieth (1/20)undivided share per capita; the applicant Mary Cordina, daughter of RitaFormosa who died on the 3rd April, 2009, the latter being the sister of TeresaAttard, and this in the share of one twentieth (1/20) undivided share percapita; the applicant Mariano sive Mario Formosa, son of Rita Formosa who diedon the 3rd April, 2009, the latter being the sister of Teresa Attard, and thisin the share of one twentieth (1/20) undivided share per capita; GregoryJefferson, Nicholas Joseph, Andrew Francis and Catherine Marie siblingsFormosa, children of Francis Formosa who died on the 3rd September, 2008, thelatter being the son of Rita Formosa née Attard who died on the 3rd April,2009, and the latter being the sister of Teresa Attard, and this in the shareof one twentieth (1/20) undivided share between them per stirpes.
Wherefore, any person who considers to have aninterest in the matter is hereby called upon to appear before the said Courtand to bring forward his objections hereto by a minute to be filed withinfifteen days from the posting of the banns.
Voluntary Jurisdiction
Dorianne Cordina
For the Registrar, Gozo Courts and Tribunals
Notice 819
819It is hereby notified that the Court of Magistrates(Malta) by means of a decree given on the 28th April, 2017, in the records ofthe judicial letter number 2199/16, in the names Argus Insurance AgenciesLimited vs Keith Attard et, ordered the following publication for the purposeof effecting service on the defendants, in terms of Article 187(3) of Cap. 12.
By means of a judicial letter filed in the Court ofMagistrates (Malta) against Keith Attard of 41, Flat 1, Triq San Frangisk,Floriana and Philisianne Attard of 41, Flat 1, Triq San Frangisk, Florianaand/or St Catherine Flat 1, Triq Efesu, St Paul’s Bay, on the 26th August,2016, Argus Insurance Agencies Limited (C 597) for and on behalf of the foreigncompany Argus Insurance Company (Europe) Limited of La Concorde, Triq AbateRigord, Ta’ Xbiex , in the first place, it makes reference to the car accidentthat occured on the 7th July, 2014, in Pjazza Robert Sammut, Floriana, whichinvolved you Philisianne Attard whilst you were driving the vehicle withregistration number GBO 625 insured by the interpellant Keith Attard, and tothe fact that you still did not make any claim and did not pay the amountrepresenting the excess payment due by you. This is in breach of yourobligations in terms of the relative General Conditions of the InsurancePolicy.
The interpellant informs you, for all purposes andeffects of law that in the circumstances, in the event that it is obliged tomake any payments in your name according to law, it is hereby reserving itsposition in your regard so that it recovers all related amounts according tothe policy and at law.
In the circumstances, you are being solicited for thelast time to pay the amount due by you as excess payment as above mentioned
So much for your own guidance
With costs
Alexandra Debattista
For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals