Court Notices published in Govt. Gazette No. 20,286 of 29th October 2019

ARB/C057/2019 – NEW FREEZING ORDER

IT IS BEING NOTIFIED that by a decree dated 24th October, 2019, given by the Court of Magistrates (Malta) as a Court of Criminal Inquiry – (Magistrate Dr Audrey Demicoli LLD). Compilation Number 641/2019 in the case:

The Police

(Inspector Justine Grech)

Versus

JOSEF MAJRI, electrician and in work related to film industry, 22 years, son of Mohsen Ben Kaddoura Majri and Gizelle Mejri née Schembri, born in Tal-Pietà, Malta on the 23rd March, 1997, residing at 219, Dove Court Flat 4, Triq San Anard, Ħal Tarxien and holder of Maltese Identity Card bearing number 125797M.

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

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

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

THE DIRECTOR, ASSET RECOVERY BUREAU

On behalf of the Registry of the Courts of Criminal Jurisdiction (Malta)

It is hereby notified that by an application filed in the Court of Magistrates (Gozo) Voluntary Jurisdiction on the twenty-first (21st) of October of the year two thousand and ninteen (2019) (Application number 114/2019BS) Anthony Bartolo et requested the opening of the succession of Michael Bartolo, bachelor, son of the late Michael Bartolo and Carmela nee Buttigieg, born and used to reside in Qala, Gozo, died in Qala, Gozo, on the ninth (9th) of August of the year two thousand and seven (2007), intestate, that Michael Bartolo was superseded by his sister Margaret Zammit widow of George Zammit, his brother Anthony Bartolo, his brother Joseph Bartolo, his sister Mary Aquilina wife of Raphael Aquilina, his sister Loreta Vella wife of Peter Paul Vella that subsequently died on the twenty-seventh (27th) of February of the year two thousand and ninteen (2019) and according to her will in the acts of Notary Maria Grima dated twenty-second (22nd) of February of the year two thousand and ninteen (2019) nominated as universal heirs her four children Maryanne Bigeni wife of Carmel Bigeni, Christopher Vella, Joseph Vella and Michael Vella equally between them. His two other siblings are Jane spinster Bartolo who died before him on the thirteenth (13th) of February of the year two thousand and one (2001) and Sister Mary Josephine Bartolo in the century Concetta Bartolo who took the solemn votes on the eighteenth (18th) of April of the year ninteen eighty-two (1982) and therefore renounced any heredity both present and even future, which openng of succession is to be made  as to one fifth (1/5) undivided share in favour of Margaret Zammit, as to one fifth (1/5) undivided share in favour of Anthony Bartolo, as to one fifth (1/5) undivided share in favour of Joseph Bartolo, as to one fifth (1/5) undivided share in favour of Mary Aquilina, as to one fifth  (1/5) undivided share between them in favour of Maryanne Bigeni, Christopher Vella, Joseph Vella and Michael Vella as the successors of their mother Loreta Vella.

Wherefore any person who considers to have an interest in the matter is hereby called upon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections hereto by a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns.

DORIANNE CORDINA

For the Registrar, Gozo Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree given by the Civil Court (Family Section) on the 14th October, 2019, by this Court (JPG), in the records of the Sworn Application in the names Mifsud Theresa (ID 315569M) vs Mifsud Mario (ID 558361M), Application Number 39/2019 (JPG), the following publication was ordered for the purpose of service of the respondent Mario Mifsud (ID 558361M) in terms of Article 187(3) et sequitur of Cap. 12.

By means of a Sworn Application filed in the Civil Court (Family section) in the names Theresa Mifsud (ID 315569M) vs Mario Mifsud (ID 558361M) on the 7th February, 2019, the applicant Therese Mifsud (ID 315569M) asked this Honourable Court:

1. To declare and pronounce the personal separation between the parties and this due to faults solely and exclusively imputable to the respondent as premised in the application and authorise the applicant to live in the same matrimonial home separately from the respondent and this for the reasons indicated in the application, and uphold the other demands in the same application for separation.

With costs against the respondent from now summoned so that a reference to his evidence be made

The Sworn Application in the names Mifsud Theresa (ID 315569M) vs Mifsud Mario (ID 558361M), Application Number 39/2019 (JPG), has been deferred for hearing to Friday, 10th January, 2020, at 9.30 a.m.

Defendant: Block C , Flat 1, Triq Berta Kilg, San Ġiljan

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

It is hereby notified that by an application filed in the Court of Magistrates (Gozo) Voluntary Jurisdiction on the 17th of October, 2019 (Application number 112/2019BS) Josephine Doreen Theresa Malady requested the opening of the succession of her brother Raymond Axiak, son of the late Emanuel Axiak and Maria nee Mercieca, born and used to reside in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, died in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia on the fifth (5th) of August of the year two thousand and fifteen (2015), intestate, had no children and was superseded only by his mother Mary Axiak, because his father died before him, and applicant Josephine Doreen Theresa Malady as his only sister. Therefore according to the Laws of Malta as lex situs, the immovable assets that he had in Malta as to one half (1/2) undivided share in favour of his mum Mary Axiak and as to another one half (1/2) undivided share in favour of applicant Josephine Doreen Theresa Malady. That applicant's mother, Mary Axiak, died on the seventeenth (17th) of February of the year two thousand and ninteen (2019) and regulated her succession with a will drawn up in Australia on the thirteenth (13th) of April of the year ninteen ninety-nine (1999) where she left as universal heirs the applicant Josephine Doreen Theresa Malady and her brother Raymond Axiak; and naturally since Raymond died before his mother, her succession  was supersed exclusively by applicant Josephine Doreen Theresa Malady, which opening of succession is to be made in favour of his mother Mary Axiak and in favour of Josephine Doreen Theresa Malady as to one half (1/2) undivided share between them, and following the death of Mary Axiak, now the applicant  Josephine Doreen Theresa Malady is the only beneficiary of her brother.

Wherefore any person who considers to have an interest in the matter is hereby called upon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections hereto by a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns.

DORIANNE CORDINA

For the Registrar, Gozo Courts and Tribunals

Republic of Malta

To the Executive Officer (Courts of Magistrates) Gozo

It is hereby notified that by a decree dated the 18th October, 2019, the Court of Magistrates (Gozo) Superior Jurisdiction, Voluntary Section, ordered the publication of the extract reproduced hereunder for the purpose of service in terms of sections 187(3) and 931(3) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure.

Whereas by a decree dated the 18th October, 2019, in the records of the application number 111/2019BS by the Court of Magistrates (Gozo), Superior Jurisdiction, Voluntary Section upon an application filed by Josephine Muscat et, so that said curator would represent the absent Peter Paul Muscat filed on the 16th October, 2019, in the Court of Magistrates (Gozo), Superior Jurisdiction, Voluntary Section, in the mentioned record as well as the other related and subsequent acts. They respectfully premised that:

Whereas by virtue of a preliminary agreement entered into on the 15th March, 2018, the applicants (together with their brother Peter Paul Muscat) have promised and undertaken to sell and transfer in favour of Melvin Hili (ID 365179M), Antonella Hili (ID 27885G), Florence Garzia (ID 17878G) and Anthony Bugeja (ID 14675G) the following immovable property and namely:

a) The room without official name or number, located in Triq San Blas, Nadur, Gozo, bounded on the West by the said street, on the South by an alley and on the North by property of the heirs of Ġużepp Said; or more correct boundaries;

b) A portion of land in the area known as "ta' qrib Triq San Blas", referred to as "Tal-Iskuta" in the limits of Nadur, Gozo, having a superficial area of 77.7 square meters circa, bounded on the East by property of the heirs of Salvu Muscat, on the West by property of the heirs of Mikieli Said and on the North by an alley, or more correct boundaries; and

c) The property bearing number 215 in Triq San Blas, Nadur, Gozo;

Whereas the said promise agreement has been duly registered with the Commissioner for Revenue and bears the reference PS201804022;

Whereas applicant Josephine Muscat had been verbally authorised by her brother - and namely by Peter Paul Muscat (ID 60545G) - to sign the said promise agreement in his name and on his behalf, also in view of the fact that he has an undivided share in the property referred to above; and whereas thereafter the said Peter Paul Muscat has always shown his willingness to transfer his interest in the said property on the basis of the said promise agreement;

Whereas applicants have lost contact with their said brother Peter Paul Muscat; this to such an extent that they have no idea as to where he is residing;

Whereas applicants are informed that even the Police are trying to trace the said Peter Paul Muscat in connection with criminal proceedings he is involved in;

Whereas Peter Paul Muscat enjoys one out of fifty-six shares (1/56) in the above property, equivalent to 1.785%;

Whereas all conditions stipulated in the above promise agreement have been fulfilled and applicants wish to execute the same;

Whereas to this end applicants will humbly request this Honourable Court to appoint Deputy Curators to represent the absent Peter Paul Muscat for the stated purpose.

Now, therefore and in view of the aforesaid, applicants humbly request this Honourable Court:

1. To appoint a Deputy Curator to represent the absent Peter Paul Muscat, an auto designer, son of the late Paul Muscat and the late Maria née Camilleri, born in Nadur, Gozo on the 22nd June, 1945, and whose last known address was in Rabat, Malta (ID 60545G);

2. To authorise the said Deputy Curator to represent the abovementioned Peter Paul Muscat on the deed due to be entered into and in terms of which his share in the above property shall be sold and transferred in favour of Melvin Hili (ID 365179M), Antonella Hili (ID 27885G), Florence Garzia (ID 17878G) and Anthony Bugeja (ID 14675G) on the basis of the promise agreement referred to above; and to represent him on all such deeds and other writings as may be necessary in terms of law so that the said sale may be concluded;

3. To authorise the said Deputy Curator to deduct from the proceeds due to Peter Paul Muscat as a result of the said sale, his share of taxes, plus such fees and expenses as may be imputable to him; and to deposit any remaining balance in a bank account or under this Court's authority as this Honourable Court may direct.

This under such terms and conditions as this Court may deem fit and proper according to circumstances.

Whoever is interested to be nominated as a curator is hereby called upon to call at this Registry within six (6) days and make known their interest through a note declaring therein that they accept such an assignment, and in default, this court will proceed to nominate an official curator.

And after so acting or if you should encounter any difficulty in the execution of this bann, you are to inform forthwith this Court.

Issued by the aforementioned Court of Magistrates (Gozo) Superior Jurisdiction, Voluntary Section under the signature of Magistrate Dr Brigitte Sultana LLD, LLM (Cardiff) Adv. Trib. Eccl. Melit., a Magistrate of the said Court.

DORIANNE CORDINA

For the Registrar, Gozo Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree given by the Court of Appeal by the Court herein mentioned (AE) on the 25th March, 2019, in the records of the Application in the names Myriam Vella vs Bank of Valletta p.l.c. (C 2833) Application 129/18 AE, following an Application of the Bank of Valletta p.l.c. (C 2833) of the 25th March, 2019, the following publication was ordered so that the Appeal Application which was presented by the Bank of Valletta p.l.c. in the Court of Appeal, in the records of the cause number 470/2016, before the Arbitrator for Financial Services, in the names Myriam Vella (ID 949144M), the complainant or respondent vs Bank of Valletta p.l.c. (C 2833) be notified to the said Miriam Vella (ID 949144M) in terms of Article 187(3) et sequitur of Cap 12.

By means of an Appeal Application filed in the Court of Appeal, in the records of the cause with number 470/2016, before the Arbitrator for Financial Services, Myriam Vella (ID 949144M) the complainant or respondent vs Bank of Valletta p.l.c. (C 2833) on the 2nd October, 2018, the appellant Bank of Valletta p.l.c. (C 2833) (the Bank) (the respondents or appellants) in terms of Cap. 555 of the Laws of Malta, the applicant Bank of Valletta p.l.c. respectfully pleaded:

That this is an appeal from a decision of the Arbitrator for Financial Services of the 12th September, 2018, in the case with the number and heading premised;

A. Introduction

1. From a reading of the decision of the Arbitrator one quickly arrives at the conclusion that the decision contains serious mistakes furthermore very serious legal mistakes.The most serious is that a compromise can be quickly put aside (at least formally) and considered not to constitute a compromise because the arbitration clauses are unjust.

… omissis …

B. Factual Background

3. The appellants wish in the first place to put this appeal in its temporal context.

4. The La Vallette Multi Manager Property Fund (The Fund) was established in September of 2005, as a subfund of the scheme known as La Vallette Funds Sicav p.l.c. 'is-Sicav'. This was a subfund authorised by the Malta Financial Services Authgority 'MFSA' as suitable to be sold to investors which according to the laws in force at that time described as Experienced Investors.

5. On the 8th August, 2008, the Fund suspended the business in the Fund because of the precarious global situation in the capital markets at that time.

6. The fund remained so suspended till the 18th August, 2010, when arrangements were made so that part of the shares can be negotiated again.

9. On the 2nd February, 2011, the MFSA notified the Bank of a preliminary report regarding its investigation regarding the application of IR (V) in virtue of which it was confirmed that according to it (the MFSA), the IR (V) was badly applied and asked the appellants to do their representations;

… omissis …

12. On the 5th May, 2011, the MFSA answered to the submissions which the appellants made on the 3rd March, 2011. In this report the MFSA said that after taking cognizance of the appellant's submissions it was not of the opinion that it should change its position and thus informed the appellants that it was considering to impose a substantial administrative penalty on the appellants.

… omissis …

16. This brought about the appellants so that on the 28th May, 2011, they made an offer to all the investors of the Fund to compromise the dispute between them and whereby BOV was going to pay each investor the value of his share in the fund.

… omissis …

20. The offer was accepted by every investor except for four investors which in fact also instituted the cause against the appellants.

… omissis …

23. After the dispute with the investors was closed on the 1st June 2012, the MFSA imposed another administrative penalty on the Bank and this after the investigation of the MFSA, as regards the sale practices adopted by the Bank as regards the sale of the shares of the fund.

C. The Arbitrator's Decision

26. The Arbitrator's decision in its essence in the first place rejected all the pleas raised by the appellants, amongst which the matter of competence of the arbitrator to decide on the complaints he had before him.

… omissis …

D. The Grievances in Brief

32. The grievances of the appellants are clear and manifest and thus this appeal is being filed.

… omissis …

34. The Arbitrator made a mistaken evaluation of the law when he decided that:

… omissis …

39. Even if the grievances above brought forward fail, it results that the Arbitrator made a wrong appreciation of the amount of which he ordered payment and thus it should be reviewed by this Court.

40. The grievances of the appellants shall be explained in detail later on in this application.

E. The Compromise

41. The investors that brought foward their complaint before the Arbitrator, including the complainant were round about 500, out of about 2000, who in 2011 reached a comprise with the Bank as regards their complaint.

… omissis …

76. The analysis of the Arbitrator continues by stating that these clauses that in effect led to the compromise: 'were made so that the supplier of the service make that payment which they considered they should do and exonerate themselves once and for all.'

77. These clauses are thus according to the Arbitrator unjust in terms of Art 44(2) (a)and (c) of Cap 378.

… omissis …

The Arbitrator ignores the essential disposition of the law on which he himself relied.

91. As we have seen the Arbitrator told us that he was going to consider in this order the jurisprudence, the law and the other relevant norms.

92. But in fact the Arbitrator completely ignored so much so that he did not even mention it that disposition of Cap 378, which even if he applies to a contract of compromise which is not the case, completely brings to nothing all his arguments.

93. The provision which the Arbitrator could not ignore especially if he consults the directive 93/13 and the jurisprudence of the European Courts of Justice is to be found in the provsio of Art. 45(2) of Cap 378.

102. That Cap 378, even if applies, is not intended in order that the transaction between between the consumer and the provider of a service or object be changed. It is there so that even if there are ancillary conditions to those that characterise the transaction which are unjust they be removed.

… omissis …

111. In effect the Arbitrator adopted the case of the complainant in this regard and one can state that he completely ignored the Bank's reply.

… omissis …

114. Now the true choice which the investors had before them at that time was neither the offer or nothing but not to accept the offer and institute a cause against the Bank.

… omissis …

115. All this was systematically ignored in its decision.

… omissis …

123.The injustice is very clear, but it is in the way how the arbitrator proceeded in regard to the appellants.

A Compromise cannot be reviewed under Cap 378.

124. The principal part of Art 21 (2) (a) of Cap 555 states the Arbitrator ' is' to refuse to exercise his powers when the mode of procedure is or was subject to a cause before the Court or Tribunal.

… omissis …

140. That thus according to Art 1(1) above the Directive does not apply to this type of contract.

141. According to Art, 20(2) of Cap. 378 disputes which relate to that law are to be decided either by the Consumer Claims Tribunal or by the Ordinary Courts.

… omissis …

145. It is the case that the Arbitrator has the functions and the generic jurisdiction established in Cap. 555. But if another special law which was not amended when Cap. 155 was promulgated gives another Tribunal or the Court exclusive jurisdiction on a particular matter thus the jurisdiction of the Arbitraor is limited by the operation of that law.

… omissis …

F. The complainant does not have a juridical interest.

… omissis …

G. The Prescription

165.The respondents pleaded that the complainant's demands are prescribed.

… omissis …

175. Any action that has the effect to rescind the contract in virtue of which the complainant reached a compromise with the respondents is prescribed by the lapse of two years and this on the bais of Article 1222 of Cap. 16 of the Laws of Malta.

… omissis …

H. A decision whether the complainant was an 'experienced investor' when he invested in the fund.

199. This grievance is without prejudice to the grievances regarding the preliminary pleas and of a legal nature.

200.The Arbitrator made a number of considerations to decide whether the complaint was equitable, just and reasonable and thus whether he should uphold it.

… omissis …

201. In the first place the appellants submit that the decision of the Arbitrator from this perspective is a clear example as to how in order to reach the conclusion he had to reach the Arbitrator avoided and twisted all together the fundamental principle of the right to a fair hearing and namely that who alledges has to proof.

… omissis …

205. In the first place the exercise that the Arbitrator made to determine whether the complainant is an experienced investor was already made by Mazars when they had been appointed by the MFSA. Wherever Mazars had found that the investor was not an 'experienced investor' The Arbitrator agreed with them and proceeded to order payment, but where Mazars did not so decide, The Arbitrator found that the investor was not an 'experienced investor'  he still proceded to order the payment.

… omissis …

207. The grievance of the appellant, in this sense, is obvious and namely that the Arbitrator passed on to change the onus of proof as he thought would be the most comfortable for him.

… omissis …

220.  The Bank carried out its obligation when it brought to the attention of the investor the meaning of 'experienced investor' when he obtained the signature of the inverstor and thus the confirmation that the investor qualifies for investment in the fund and that the investor read and understood the contents of the prospect and the mandatary risk warnings.

… omissis …

224. For these reasons as well the decision of the Arbitrator should be rejected.

I. Mistakes in the Calculations

… omissis …

J. Conclusion

226. Every argument of the appellant was avoided by the Arbitrator not because it was wrong but because it seems that the Arbitrator left from the fixed premise that the investors had to be declared right.

… omissis …

Thus whilst the appellants referred to the records of the proceedings, the defence, all the proof brought forward and the other documents whilst reserving to make further submissions if it be the case and bring all the other further proof which according to law they may bring, humbly pray that this Honourable Court uphold the grievances or either of which, revoke and cancel the arbitrator's decision of the 12th September, 2018, and decide by upholding the appellant's pleas or either of which and reject all the pleas of the complainant.

With costs of this procedure and of the arbitration proceedings against the respondent.

Respondent:

Block C, Flat 23, Triq is-Sur Fons, San Ġiljan STJ 1040

Flat 1, Triq Pietro Floriani, Floriana FRN 1060

Appellants: Bank of Valletta p.l.c., 58, Triq San Żakkarija, Valletta

ADV. FRANK PORTELLI, LLD

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section on the 13th September, 2019, Application number 1623/2019 by Jonathan Galea, whereby he requested that it will be declared open in his favour the succession of  his father Michael Galea, widower of Jodie nee Stringer, son of Carmelo Galea and Olga nee Vella, born in Malta, resided in Palm Harbor, Florida, United State of America and died in Palm Harbor, Pinellas County, Florida, United States of America on the 16th April, 2014, aged 62.

Wherefore any person who believes to have an interest in the matter is hereby called upon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections hereto by a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns and notices according to law.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Court and Tribunals

Republic of Malta

To the Marshall of the Court

By means of a decree given by this Court on the 17th September, 2019, following a request of Advocate Doctor Luigi A. Sansone as special mandatory of Chanel Limited it was ordered that deputy curators be chosen to represent Khair Information Consultant Limited and Elfarouk Commerce International, in the records of the Sworn Application 832/2019 MCH, in the names Advocate Dr Luigi A. Sansone noe vs Deputy Curators and in the other relative and subsequent acts.

By means of a Sworn Application filed in the Civil Court First Hall in the names Advocate Doctor Luigi A. Sansone LLB (Hons) LLD (ID 258269 M) as special mandatory of Chanel Limited, a foreign company incorporated in Companies House in England and Wales with number 00203669 and with registered address of 5, Barlow Place, London W1J 6DG in United Kingdom vs deputy curators to represent 1) Khair Information Consultant Limited foreign company with indication of address of Room 2912 Yian Plaza No 33 Jianshe Liu Road Yuexiu District Guangzhou China and (2) Elfarouk Commerce International a foreign company with indication of address of Imm Pacha Centre 75 Av.Kheireddine, Pacha Bloc C 2 Eme Etage Apt C6 Montplaisir 1073-Tunis in Tunisia on the 29th August, 2019, the applicant Advocate Doctor Luigi A. Sansone LLB (Hons) LLD (ID 258269M) as special mandatory of Chanel Limited, a foreign company incorporated in Companies House in England and Wales with number 00203669 and with registered address of 5, Barlow Place, London W1J 6DG in United Kingdom, asked this Honourable Court:

1. To declare that the entry without free release for circulation in Malta in the course of business between the defendants of a quantity of pairs of jeans and tracksuits all of which have identical trademarks to or which cannot be distinguished in their essential aspects from the trademarks of the plaintiff company and duly registered in Malta with number 13952, and also, in case of tracksuits, identical trademarks to or which cannot be distinguished in their essential aspects from the trademark of the applicant company duly registered in Malta with number 9139 which objects are all presently held under the authority of the Director General (Customs) after he found that the container TCLU 6567767 which contained them contravene the rights of intellectual property of the plaintiff company as regards the same registered trade marks.

2. Declare that the same objects and namely a quantity consisting of pairs of jeans and tracksuits all of which have on them identical trademarks to or which cannot be distinguished in their essential aspects from the trademarks of the plaintiff company duly registered in Malta with number 13952 and also, in the case of tracksuits, identical trademarks to or which cannot be distinguished in their essential aspects from the trademarks of the plaintiff company duly registered in Malta with number 9139 are falsified objects;

3. Order the Director General (Customs) to destroy those objects within a short and peremptory period without any compensation to the defendants and at their expense;

4. Take or order the Director General (Customs) to take as regards those objects any other measure in virtue of which they be removed definitely from circulation in the existing systems of commerce and the defendant be deprived from the economic benefits of the transaction;

5. Order that the defendants are to bear all the other costs in connection with this lawsuit including the costs in connection with the measures ordered in terms of the third and fourth demands of the plaintiffs amongst which those of identification and numbering of the said objects of their transport from the place of storage, the same storage, the transport from the place of storage to their eventual destruction, to the attendence of the destruction and to the removal of the waste generated from the same destruction.

With costs against the defendants summoned so that a reference to their evidence be made.

Applicant noe. Advocate Doctor Luigi A. Sansone LLB (Hons) LLD (ID 258269M) as special mandatary of Chanel Limited, a foreign company incorporated in Companies House in England and Wales with number 00203669 and with registered address of 5, Barlow Place, London W1J 6DG in United Kingdom; 84-85, Triq Melita, Valletta VLT 1120

Notify the Defendants: Deputy Curators to represent (1) Khair Information Consultant Limited foreign company with indication of address of Room 2912 Yian Plaza No 33 Jianshe Liu Road Yuexiu District Guangzhou China and (2) Elfarouk Commerce International a foreign company with indication of address of Imm Pacha Centre 75 Av.Kheireddine, Pacha Bloc C 2 Eme Etage Apt C6 Montplaisir 1073-Tunis in Tunisia

Courts of Justice, Valletta (two copies)

You are therefore ordered to affix an official copy of this bann at the entrance of this Superior Court and to summon whosoever wishes to act as curator to appear before this registry within six days and by means of a minute to submit a declaration that he wishes so to act.

You are also ordered to inform each one that if he fails to make this declaration within the stipulated time, the Court will proceed to the selection of Curators of Office.

And after so acting or if you should encounter any difficulty in the execution of this bann, you are to inform forthwith this Court.

Given by the Civil Court First Hall, above mentioned, with the witness of the Hon. Mr Justice Francesco Depasquale LL.M. (IMLI) LLD ,Doctor of Laws.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree of the 9th September, 2019, of the Rent Regulation Board, in the records of the Application in the names S&M Schembri Ltd vs Adrian Grech, Application Number 138/2019SG, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of effecting service on the respondent Adrian Grech in terms of Article 187(3) et sequitur of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

By means of an Application in the names S&M Schembri Ltd (C 8117) vs Adrian Grech (ID 0601582M) filed before the Rent Regulation Board on the 20th June, 2019, the applicant S&M Schembri Ltd requested with respect and Saviour Schembri (ID 258658M) confirmed on oath:

That the applicant company is the owner of the premises number 193, Triq il-Wied, Birkirkara;

By means of a private writing of lease dated 12th July, 2018 (see attached Doc. A) the applicant company leased to the respondent Adrian Grech the said premises at a rent as indicated in the same private writing and according to the conditions and agreements set out in the same writing;

That the respondent was in default of payment of the rent, and until today no payment for the rent due was made by the respondent;

As a result of this failure, the applicant company solicited the respondent a number of times to come in line with respect to the payment of the rent and other payments due according to the lease agreement, and this also by means of a legal letter (see attached Doc. B and Doc. C) but the respondent remained in default. The applicant company by means of a judicial letter bearing reference number 1089/2019 (see attached Doc. D) solicited the respondent to regularise himself regarding the rent payments, but the respondent, even after being duly notified with this act, remained in default;

Subsequently the applicant company proceeded to terminate the lease according to article 10 of the lease agreement, and informed the respondent by means of a judicial letter bearing reference number 1569/2019 regarding this (see attached Doc. E) and by means of which he was also solicited to vacate from the premises;

Notwithstanding all this the respondent remained in default and failed to vacate from the premises in question.

The representatives of the applicant company know of these facts personally;

In the opinion of the applicant company, the respondent does not have any defence to give against the requests of the same applicant company;

Thus, the provisions regulating proceedings without a trial in terms of Article 16A of Cap. 69 of the Laws of Malta should apply.

Thus, the respondents are to state why this Honourable Board should not decide to:

1. Proceed to the judgement according to the request of the applicant company without proceeding to trial and this in terms of Article 16A of Cap. 69 of the Laws of Malta;

2. Order the respondent so that within a short and peremptory time that is fixed by this Honourable Board, he vacates from the premises abovementioned and pass on the possession of the same to the applicant company.

With costs, including those of the judicial letter dated 25th March, 2019, holding number 1089/2019, and of the 30th April, 2019, holding number 1596/2019, against the respondent who is from now summoned so that a reference to his oath be made.

Whoever receives this sworn applicants against him has to appear before the Rent Regultion Board on the day and time established by this Honourable Board.

These procedures are summary procedures in which the judgment will be given on the first day of hearing of the application and if the respondent does not make an appearance at the sitting or if he fails to show, during that sitting, that he has a valid defence to contest the requests of the applicants.

Applicant: S&M Schembri Ltd (C 8117), 21 Schesilmar, Triq ix-Xarolla, Ħ'Attard ATD 3062

Respondent Notification: Adrian Grech, 100 Villa Orchidea, Triq il-Missjoni Taljana, Kalkara

The application in the names S&M Schembri Ltd vs Adrian Grech, Application Number 138/2019SG, has been postponed for hearing to the 18th November, 2019, at 1.15 p.m.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

Republic of Malta

To the Marshall of the Court

By means of a decree given by this Court on the 3rd October, 2019, following a request of Advocate Doctor Peter Fenech noe it was ordered that deputy curators be chosen to represent the absent consegnetary El Farouk Commerce International, in the records of the Sworn Application 923/2019 MCH, in the names Advocate Dr Peter Fenech noe vs Deputy Curators and in the other relative and subsequent acts.

By means of a Sworn Application filed in the Civil Court First Hall, in the names Advocate Doctor Peter Fenech as special mandatary of the foreign companies Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare (UK) IP Limited registered in England and Smithkline Beecham Limited registered in England vs deputy curators to represent the absent consegnetary El Farouk Commerce International from Tunisia, on the 30th September, 2019, the applicant Advocate Doctor Peter Fenech as special mandatary of the foreign companies Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare (UK) IP Limited registered in England and Smithkline Beecham Limited registered in England asked this Honourable Court and whilst the same Advocate Doctor Peter Fenech (ID 674668M) confirmed on oath and declares that he knows about the facts personally:

1. To declare that the objects consisting of a number that has to be determined of toothpaste with the identical trademarks for, or that may be recognised from their essential aspect from those of the company Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare (UK) IP Limited duly registered as trademarks with the European Union (EUTMs) that is: (a) the word mark Aquafresh with registration number 01144757 dated 19.04.1999 (Doc. GSK 1); (b) the word Aquafresh with registration number 003254364 dated 09.07.2003 (Doc. GSK 2); (c) figurtive mark with registration number 000654426 dated 14.10.1997 (Doc. GSK 3); (d) figurative mark with registration number 002463164 dated 15.11.2001 (Doc. GSK 4) and also those of the company Smithkline Beecham Limited regarding the trademarks of the European Union (EUTMs) that is (i) the word Glaxo Smitkline with registration number 001697119 dated 08.06.2000 (Doc. GSK 5); (ii) the word Glaxosmithkline with registration number 001886647 dated 5.10.2000 (Doc. GSK 6); (iii) the word GSK with registration number 001697812 dated 08.06.200 (Doc. GSK 7); (iv) figurative mark with registration number 001958420 dated 16.11.2000 (Doc. GSK 8) which are presently found under the authority of the Director General (Customs) after he suspended the release of the container with number CMAU7206019 containing the said merchandise, which are counterfeit and contravene the rights of intellectual property to the companies Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare (UK) IP Limited and Smithkline Beecham Limited represented by the applicant company and this by means of the nomination of experts for this reason;

2. Orders the Director General (Customs) to dispose of the said merchandise outside the channels of commerce, in such a a manner as to preclude any damage to the applicant company and the public consumer or order the Director General (Customs) to destroy the said merchandise in any case without any compensation and at the expense of the respondents;

3. Order the respondents are to bear all the costs connected with the measures ordered in terms of the second (2) and third (3) demands of the applicants' demands including those of transport of the said merchandise for storage in Malta, before their eventual destruction, of the storage itself for tallying and all the expenses due to the Director General (Customs) from the beginning of the procedures as well as the transport from the place of storage till the eventual destruction including all the costs incurred for the final destruction of the said merchandise.

With costs against the defendants summoned so that a reference to their evidence be made.

Applicant noe: 36, Triq l-Arċisqof, Valletta VLT 1447

Deputy curators: Law Courts, Valletta

You are therefore ordered to affix an official copy of this bann at the entrance of this Superior Court and to summon whosoever wishes to act as curator to appear before this registry within six days and by means of a minute to submit a declaration that he wishes so to act.

You are also ordered to inform each one that if he fails to make this declaration within the stipulated time, the Court will proceed to the selection of Curators of Office.

And after so acting or if you should encounter any difficulty in th execution of this bann, you are to inform forthwith this Court.

Given by the Civil Court First Hall, abovementioned, with the witness of the Hon. Mr Justice Lawrence Mintoff, Doctor of Laws.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section on the 2nd September, 2019, Application number 1539/2019 by Kurt Mizzi, whereby he requested that it will be declared open in  his favour the succession of  his mother Maria Rosaria Caruana, legally separated from Mario Mizzi, daughter of Emanuel Caruana and Josephine nee Bonnici, born in Ħal Tarxien, Malta, resided in Ħ'Attard and died in Tal-Qroqq, Msida, Malta  on the 18th March, 2019, aged 61, and who held identity card number 188058M.

Wherefore any person who believes to have an interest in the matter is hereby called upon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections hereto by a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns and notices according to law.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Court and Tribunals

By means of a decree of the 16th September, 2019, of the Rent Regulation Board, in the records of the Application in the names Maria Fatima Vassallo et vs Josephine Zerafa, Application Number 145/2019SG, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of effecting service on the respondent Josephine Zerafa in terms of Article 187(3) et sequitur of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

By means of an application in the names Maria Fatima Vassallo (ID 285150M) and for any interest he may have John Vassallo (ID 390646M) Maria Fatima Vassallo's husband vs Josephine Zerafa (ID 3298620M) filed before the Rent Regulation Board on the 25th June 2019, the applicants Maria Fatima Vassallo et request with respect that:

The applicant Maria Fatima Vassallo is the owner of the premises 15, The Stars, Flat 3, Triq Alessandru, Birżebbuġa, which premises was bequeathed to her pursuant to her parents' inheritance, a copy of which documents are attached as Doc. GMKFV 1 till Doc. GMFV 8 inclusive;

The applicant used to lease the premises in question by means of a lease agreement dated 7th November, 2015, a copy of which is being attached as Doc GMFV 9. According to the agreement, the lease had to expire on the 31st October, 2018, according to clause with letter (n) in the same lease agreement;

Till today the respondent is still occupying the premises in an abusive and illegal way, and this although solicted several times as shown from document GMFV 10;

By means of this application, the applicant is requesting the eviction of the respondent Josephine Zerafa from the premises 15, The Stars, Flat 3, Triq Alessandru, Birżebbuġa and this because the lease expired;

The applicants declare with all due respect that the respondent does not have any defence to the action de quo;

Together with this application an affidavit of the applicant Mary Fatima Vassallo and of John Vassallo is being exhibited (Doc. GMFV 11 and Doc. GMFV 11A) where they declare that they know all the facts to request the eviction of the respondent from the premises 15, The Stars, Flat 3, Triq Alessandru, Birżebbuġa.

Thus the applicants spouses Vassallo are requesting with respect this Honourable Board to:

1. Declare that the respondent has no valid title of lease to the premises 15, The Stars, Flat 3, Triq Alessandru, Birżebbuġa;

2. Declare that the respondent is occupying the premises 15, The Stars, Flat 3, Triq Alessandru, Birżebbuġa in an abusive and illegal way;

3. Order the respondent to vacate and evict the premises within one week from the date of the judgment.

With costs and reserving the right to any other futher legal action by the applicants.

Applicants: Primavera, 77, Triq Ħal Tarxien, Ħal Tarxien

Respondent: 15, The Stars, Flat 3, Triq Alessandru, Birżebbuġa

The application in the names Maria Fatima Vassallo et vs Josephine Zerafa, Application Number 145/2019SG, has been postponed for hearing to the 18th November, 2019, at 1.15 p.m.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree of the 6th September, 2019, of the Rent Regulation Board, in the records of the Application in the names Malta Industrial Parks Limited vs Stainless Steel Products Limited, Application Number 142/2019SG, the following publication was ordered for the purpose of effecting service on the respondent company Stainless Steel Products Limited in terms of Article 187(3) et sequitur of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

By means of an application in the names Malta Industrial Parks Limited (C 28965) vs Stainless Steel Products Limited (C 2029) filed before the Rent Regulation Board on the 21st June, 2019, the applicant Malta Industrial Parks Limited (C 28965) requested with respect and Charles Pearsall (ID 98157M) holding the position of debtor executive with the applicant company duly authorised confirms on oath that:

By means of a private writing of the 1st August, 2017, Doc. A, the applicant gave by title of lease to the respondent company the factory number BLB038 in Industrial Estate, Bulebel for a period of five (5) years and eleven months, which term started from the 1st February, 2018, till the 31st December, 2023, under the terms and conditions hereunder;

The lease was for an annual rent of €58,014.14 excluding value added tax, which rent had to be paid in advance on the 1st January, 1st April, 1st July and 1st October of each year by means of a direct debit mandate system;

The respondent company remained in default of payment for several installments which arrears amount to €92,033.19 excluding VAT;

That on the 24th January, 2019, by means of a judicial letter numbered 272/19, Doc. B, the applicant company solicited the respondent company to pay the rent due for the period from the 1st February, 2018, till the 31st March, 2019, for the sum of €74,919.01 and was also solicited to make use of the said factory for the reason it was leased, to employ with it the number of employees as agreed with the Malta Enterprise, to comply with the laws of Health and Safety at Work because it seems that in the factory there is dangerous material that is not being stored as it is meant to be stored, and finally to keep the factory insured as in the terms of the lease agreement abovementioned. Such solicitation was made in terms of the lease according to clauses numbered 6.1, 6.3, 6.5, 6.6 and 6.8 of the same lease agreement;

Although duly solicited, the respondent company remained in default of payment as results from the statement attached and marked as Doc. C, and also failed to abide with the lease agreement;

Thus on the 18th June, 2019, a letter was sent to the respondent company, Doc. D, to serve as a notice of termination of the lease in terms of clause 6 of the said lease agreement;

Thus, till today the respondent company has to pay the amount of €92,033.19, which sum covers the rent of the 1st February, 2018, till the 30th June, 2019;

In addition, it seems that the respondent company stopped operating from Malta, as shown in the article attached as Doc. E;

The amount abovementioned is certain, liquid and due and as far as the applicant knows the respondent does not have any valid defences to give to the requests of the applicant;

All this constitutes a breach of the conditions of the lease according to Article 1570 of Cap. 16 of the Laws of Malta, and also according to clause 6 of the said lease agreement, which clause provides for instances which lead to the termination of the lease, which includes amongst others that the tenant is in default of payment by more than 45 days from the date of payment, or breaches the conditions of the lease regarding the insurance, or makes different use to that agreed or does not make use of the premises or if it does not employ the established number of employees in the letter of intent of Malta Enterprise, or if it had breached or failed to abide with the law or regulations particularly the laws of health and safety, then MIP can resort to legal actions against the respondent company including the termination of the lease and eventually the eviction from the same factory;

It follows therefore that the applicant company is entitled to resume possession as free and unencumbered of the property BLB038 of Industrial Estate, Bulebel whilst that it requests the payment of the rent due and also for the consideration due till the date it resumes possession of premises;

In the opinion of the applicant company in terms of Art. 16A of Cap. 69 of the Laws of Malta, this applicantion merits to be decided without proceeding to trial because in the opinion of the applicant company the respondent does not have any defences to bring to the requests of eviction and to payment of arrears of rent due which debt is certain, liquid and due and for this reason the requests of the applicant company has to be upheld without this Honourable Board having to proceed to trial;

The reason for this request is that there exist the elements which entitle the applicant to request the termination of the lease because of default in payment for more than one year rent and thus the applicant company is entitled to resume possession of the property BLB038 free and unencumbered at Industrial Estate, Bulebel whilst requesting the payment of the rent and since there exist all the elements required for Art. 16A of Cap. 69, and accordingly this case has to be decided without proceeding to trial.

Thus for the above reasons the applicant company requests this Honourable Board so that, subject to the necessary declarations and the opportune directions, it decides the case without proceeding to trial and orders the respondent company so that within a short and peremptory period fixed by this Honourable Board it orders the respondent to vacate from the factory BLB038 in Industrial Estate, Bulebel and to return the premises free and unencumbered in favour of the applicant company whilst ordering it to pay the sum of €92,033.19 which sum represents the rent due till today.

With costs including those of the judicial letter number 272/19 and with legal interest against the respondent company who is from now summoned so that a reference to its oath be made and reserving the right for any other action due the applicant company according to law and event the payment of the consideration due till the the date of effective eviction.

Applicant: MIP, Telgħet Gwardamanġa, Tal-Pietà

Respondent: Astracast, BLB038, Qasam Industrijali, Bulebel

The application in the names Malta Industrial Parks Limited vs Stainless Steel Products Limited, Application Number 142/2019SG, has been postponed for hearing to the 18th November, 2019, at 1.15p.m.

This application is made by means of a special summary proceedings in which proceedings, the judgment will be given on the first day of hearing of the application and if the respondent do not make an appearance at the sitting or if he fails to show, during that sitting, that they have a valid defence and reasons to contest the applicant's request.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section on the 19th September, 2019, Application number 1649/2019 by Annabella Maria Jane Oliver pro et noe, whereby they requested that it will be declared open in  favour of Annabella Maria Jane Oliver and her sister Antoinette Paola Carmela Stamper the succession of  their mother Filomena Allen, widow of Leslie Allen, daughter of the late Paolo Cremona and Maria nee Micallef, born in Ħamrun, Malta, resided in Iklin, Malta and died in Msida, Malta on the 5th April, 2018, aged 95, and who held identity card number 0208623M.

Wherefore any person who believes to have an interest in the matter is hereby called upon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections hereto by a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns and notices according to law.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Court and Tribunals

By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section on the 5th September, 2019, Application number 1569/2019 by Francis Farrugia et, whereby they requested that it will be declared open in favour of Francis Farrugia, Carmen Debono, Joseph Mary Farrugia, Catherine Zammit, John Baptist Farrugia and Pauline Zammit brothers and sisters Farrugia the succession of their aunt Giuseppa sive Josephine Farrugia, unmarried, daughter of the late Paolo Farrugia and Caterina nee Bonnici, born in Żurrieq, Malta, resided in Żurrieq and died in Tal-Qroqq, Msida, Malta on the 15th May, 2019, aged 91, and who held identity card number 0100028M.

Wherefore any person who believes to have an interest in the matter is hereby called upon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections hereto by a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns and notices according to law.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Court and Tribunals

By a decree of the Small Claims Tribunal of 13th June, 2019, the publication of the following extract was ordered for the purpose of service on the respondent Farcat Morgone Elisabeth in terms of Article 187(3) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

Carmel Mary sive Charles Cutajar (ID 523363M) and Jacqueline Cutajar (ID 73086M) of 87, Triq iż-Żerniq, Msida, filed a Claim on the 5th June, 2019, whereby they asked the Tribunal to condemn Jesmond Cutajar, Rose Sacco, Carlo Dione Dagostino and Farcat Morgone Elisabeth (ID 107509A) of 14, Galeone, Fl. 5, Triq San Pietru, Ħal Kirkop, to pay the plaintiffs the sum of €855.62 which amount is due to the plaintiffs.

With costs

The case (Claim Number 127/19ASFJ) is deferred on the 11th November, 2019, at 12.30 p.m.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 13th September, 2019, Application number 1626/2019 by John Cassar, whereby he requested that it will be declared open in favour of Grace Cassar mother of the decujus in the quota of one fourth (1/4) undivided share, in favour of the heirs of Joseph Cassar, father of the decujus in the quota of one fourth (1/4) undivided share, and in favour of John and Walter brothers Cassar, brothers of the decujus in the quota of one fourth (1/4) undivided share each one of them the succession of  Stefan Cassar, bachelor, son of Joseph Cassar and Grace Mary nee Payne, born in Tal-Pietà, Malta, resided in Marsaskala, Malta, and died in Tal-Qroqq, Msida, Malta on the 2nd July, 2017, aged 23, and who held identity card number 71694M.

Wherefore any person who believes to have an interest in the matter is hereby called upon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections hereto by a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns and notices according to law.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Court and Tribunals

By a decree of the Consumer Claims Tribunal of 26th September, 2019, the publication of the following extract was ordered for the purpose of service in terms of Article 187(3) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

John Agius Vadala of 12, Bejt El-Qaws, Triq Oleander, The Gardens, St Julians STJ 1912, filed a Claim on the 30th April, 2019, whereby he asked the Tribunal to condemn Roderick Bellizzi of Block C3, Flat 8, Triq Fonzu Maria Galea, Birkirkara, to pay the plaintiff the sum of €1498 which amount is due to the plaintiff.

The case (CCT Number 56/19) is deferred on the 19th November, 2019, at 1.00 p.m.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section on the 9th September, 2019, Application number 1581/2019 by Lorenza Calleja et, whereby they requested that it will be declared open in favour of the same Lorenza Calleja widow of the decujus in the quota of one half (1/2) undivided share and in favour of Stephen and Antoine brothers Calleja children of the decujus in the quota of one fourth (1/4) undivided share each one of them the succession of  Joseph Calleja, husband of Lorenza Calleja, son of the late Paolo and Antonia nee Sacco, born in Bormla, Malta, resided in Paola, Malta and died at Tal-Qroqq, Msida, Malta on the 30th April, 2018, aged 82, and who held identity card number 769735M.

Wherefore any person who believes to have an interest in the matter is hereby called upon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections hereto by a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns and notices according to law.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Court and Tribunals

By means of an application filed in the Civil Court of Voluntary Jurisdiction Section, on the 3rd September, 2019, Application number 1543/2019 by Maria Carmela sive Carmela Azzopardi et whereby they requested that it will be declared open in favour of Maria Carmela sive Carmela Azzopardi wife of the decujus in the quota of one half (1/2) undivided share and  in favour of Carmel Azzopardi and Rita Bezzina children of the decujus brother and sister Azzopardi in the  quota of one fourth (1/4) undivided share each one of them the succession of  Geraldo sive Gerard Azzopardi, husband of Maria Carmela sive Carmela Azzopardi, son of the late Filippo Azzopardi and Tereża nee Bezzina, born in Ħ'Attard, Malta, resided in Rabat, Malta and died in Rabat, Malta on the 8th February, 2019, aged 79, and who held identity card number 523139M.

Wherefore any person who believes to have an interest in the matter is hereby called upon to appear before the said Court and to bring forward his objections hereto by a minute to be filed within fifteen days from the posting of the banns and notices according to law.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Court and Tribunals

Republic of Malta

To the Marshall of the Court

By means of a decree given by this Court on the 19th September, 2019, following a request of Advocate Doctor Antoine Camilleri noe it was ordered that deputy curators be chosen to represent Khair Information Consultant Limited and Elfarouk Commerce International, in the records of the Sworn Application 888/2019 MCH, in the names Advocate Dr Antoine Camilleri noe vs Deputy Curators and in the other relative and subsequent acts.

By means of a Sworn Application filed in the Civil Court First Hall in the names Advocate Doctor Antoine Camilleri (ID 495376 M) as special procurator for and on behalf of two foreign companies adidas International Marketing B.V. of Atlas Arena, Afrika Building, Hoogoorddreef 9a, NL-1101 BA Amsterdam ZO, The Netherlands and adidas AG of Adi –Dassler Str 1 Herzogenaurach 91074, Germany vs deputy curators to represent Khair Information Consultant Limited of Room 2912 Yian Plaza No 33 Jianshe Liu Road Yeuxiu District Guangzhou China and Elfarouk Commerce International of Imm Pacha Centre 75 AV.Kheireddine, Pacha Bloc C2 Eme Etage Apt. C6 Montplaisir 1073-Tunis in Tunisia on the 17th September, 2019, the applicant Advocate Doctor Antoine Camilleri for and on behalf of two foreign companies adidas International Marketing B.B. and adidas AG asked this Honourable Court:

1. As regards the two applicant companies, declare and decide that the sports shoes in question and which are seized after the application in writing made by the companies to the Comptroller, are falsified objects, and/or objects brought in by piracy according to Article 2(1)(a) and/or Cap. 414 of the Laws of Malta and/or according to Article 2(5) and/or (6) of the EU Regulations 608/2013;

2. As regards the first applicant company adidas International Marketing B.V., declares and decides that the entry into Malta and/or the temporary importation and/or storing in a free zone or warehouse of this consignment of sports shoes which consists of 1700 pairs of sports shoes, in container number TCLU6567767, on part of the respondents or any one of them, which were seized after the application in writing made by the applicant company to the Comptroller, contravene the rights of intellectual property of the applicant company in so far as they are not genuine according to Article 2(1)(a) and/or (b) of Cap. 414 of the Laws of Malta and thus violate Article 4 of the same Cap. 414 and this in regard to the registration of the EU Trade Mark number 005271572 registered in the name of the applicant company and/or in regards of the rights of the author that the applicant company has on the design three stripes device (as shown by the same EU Trade Mark number 005271572);

3. As regards the first applicant company adidas International Marketing B.V. declares and decides that the entry without free release for circulation in Malta in the course of business of the said consignment of sports shoes (including the packaging) which consists of 1700 pairs of sports shoes, in container number TCLU6567767, on part of the respondents or any one of them, which were seized after the application in writing made by the applicant company to the Comptroller, contravene the exclusive rights of the applicant company in so far as they are not genuine and thus in violation of Article 9(1)(2)(3) and (4) of the EU Regulations 2017/1001, and this as regards the registration of the EU Trade Mark number 005271572 registered in the name of the applicant company;

4. As regards the second applicant company adidas AG, declare and decide that the entry without into Malta and/or the temporary importation and/or storing in a free zone or warehouse of this consignment of sports shoes which consists of 1700 pairs of sports shoes, in container number TCLU6567767, on part of the respondents or any one of them, which were seized after the application in writing made by the applicant company to the Comptroller, contravene the rights of intellectual property of the applicant company in so far as they are not genuine according to Article 2(1)(a) and/or (b) of Cap. 414 of the Laws of Malta and thus violate Article 4 of the same Cap. 414 and this in regard to the registration of the EU Trade Mark number 014591754, number 003517646, number 005271598 and number 005271580 registered in the name of the applicant company and/or in regards of the rights of the author that the applicant company has on the design three stripes device on footwear and trefoil device (as shown by the same EU Trade Marks numbers 003517646 and 005271598);

5. As regards the second applicant company adidas AG declare and decied that that the entry without free release for circulation in Malta in the course of business of the said consignment of sports shoes (including the packaging) which consists of 1700 pairs of sports shoes, in container number TCLU6567767, on part of the respondents or any one of them, which were seized after the application in writing made by the applicant company to the Comptroller, contravene the exclusive rights of the applicant company in so far as they are not genuine and thus in violation of Article 9(1)(2)(3) and (4) of the EU Regulations 2017/1001, and this as regards the registration of the EU Trade Marks number 014591754, number 005271598 and number 005271580 registered in the name of the applicant company;

6. Orders the Comptroller and/or the applicant companies on the basis of the first demand, and/or second demand and/or third demand and/or forth demand and/or the fifth demand destroy the sports shoes in question without compensation to, and at costs of the respondents or any one of them, according to Article 8 of Cap. 414 of the Laws of Malta and according the provisions of EU regulations 608/2013;

7. Orders any other remedy which it can according to the terms of Cap. 414 of the Laws of Malta, Cap. 597 of the Laws of Malta, Cap. 488 of the Laws of Malta, EU Regulation 608/2013 and EU Regulation 2017 in regard to the applicant companies;

8. Orders the respondent company or any one of them to pay all the expenses in regard of the transport, of the storage, of the destruction of the sports shoes in question and the official costs of Customs Officials in terms of Cap. 414 of the Laws of Malta and of the EU Regulation 608/2013.

With costs against the respondent company or any one of them from now summoned so that a reference to its evidence be made.

Applicant: Dr Antoine Camilleri noe, Mamo TCV Palazzo Pietro Stiges, 103, Triq id-Dejqa, Valletta VLT 1436

Notification: Deputy curators

You are therefore ordered to affix an official copy of this bann at the entrance of this Superior Court and to summon whosoever wishes to act as curator to appear before this registry within six days and by means of a minute to submit a declaration that he wishes so to act.

You are also ordered to inform each one that if he fails to make this declaration within the stipulated time, the Court will proceed to the selection of Curators of Office.

And after so acting or if you should encounter any difficulty in the execution of this bann, you are to inform forthwith this Court.

Given by the Civil Court First Hall, abovementioned, with the witness of the Hon. Mr Justice Lawrence Mintoff LLD, Doctor of Laws.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By a decree of the Consumer Claims Tribunal of 2nd October, 2019, the publication of the following extract was ordered for the purpose of service in terms of Article 187(3) of the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure (Cap. 12).

Simon Lee Jackson of 36, Triq ix-Xiber, Swieqi, SWQ 2486, filed a Claim on the 21st January, 2019, whereby he asked the Tribunal to condemn Shaun Butler of Christef Flat No. 2, Triq il-Maskli, San Pawl il-Baħar, to pay the plaintiff the sum of €3494.06 which amount is due to the plaintiff.

The case (CCT Number 13/19) is deferred on the 7th November, 2019, at 1.30 p.m.

ALEXANDRA DEBATTISTA

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals