Court Notices published in Government Gazette no 21,677 of 24th June 2026

By means of a decree of the 13th May, 2026, in the records of application number 871/2020, in the names of Carmelo Gauci (ID 79546M) vs Cancas Limited (C11934), the following publication was ordered for the purpose of effecting service on the respondent Camcas Limited in terms of Article 187 (3) et sequitur of Cap. 12 of the Laws of Malta.

By means of Appeal Application number 871/2020 filed on the 6th February, 2026, in the names premised, the respondent applicants declare that the judgment of the 16th December 2025 as regards the first and second demand of the appellant applicant is just and deserves confirmation with all the double costs against the appellant company. The exponents also wish to avail themselves of the main appeal filed by the appellant company in order to file a cross-appeal against the appealed judgement.

The applicants ground of appeal is clear and manifest and consists in the fact that the Honourable First Court on the 16th December, 2025 made a wrong appreciation of the facts of the case and of the law, which led it to erroneously dismiss their third demand as contained in their application. Whereas by means of a third demand, the applicants asked this Honourable Court to declare that the land of not less than 3,950 sq.m. bounded on the South by Triq il-Ghirghien, North by an unnamed public alley and on the South East by the property of the family Schembri,  that the property of the respondent company, has a means of exit on Triq il-Għirgħien, a public road.

Thus, the applicants respectfully request that this Honourable Court:

(1) Upholds the judgment under appeal of the 16th December 2025 where it upheld the appellants’ first claim and the second claim in parte in their sworn application;

(2) Revoke it where it dismissed the third demand of the respondent applicants in their sworn application, and instead uphold the same demand;

(3) Uphold the rest of the first judgment given by the First Hall Civil Court, whereby it dismissed the pleas of the appellant company.

With costs of both instances against the appellant company.

Notification:

Camcas Limited (C11934) — Giuliana, Triq Lapsi, San Ġiljan

DR FRANCO BONDIN LLD, M.Jur.

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree delivered by the Court of Appeal (Superior Jurisdiction) on the 13th of April, 2026, in the records of Application number 1098/2017 in the names David Farrugia (ID 74874M) vs Carmine di Ciccio (ID 30718A), the following publication was ordered for the purpose of effecting service on Carmine di Ciccio the respondent in terms of Article 187(3) et sequitur of Cap 12 of the Laws of Malta.

By means of Appeal Application number 1098/2017 filed on the 15th of November, 2024, in the names premised, the appellant felt aggrieved by the judgment dated 17th October 2024 by the First Hall Civil Court whereby it decided the cause by dismissing the first plea of prescription raised by the defendant and all the plaintiff’s demands, with costs to be borne by the plaintiff and is therefore filing this appeal before this Honourable Court on the following grounds;

(1) the First Hall Civil Court was totally mistaken when it declared that the respondent Carmine di Ciccio is not solely responsible for his abusive behaviour when he assaulted the appellant, David Farrugia; (2) the Court of First Instance failed to acknowledge not only the fact that the Prosecution at the time failed to bring forward ocular evidence which was useful to establish the guilt of the accused as in the case of the elder son Matthew Farrugia but furthermore it was clear that there were various shortcomings made by the Police at the time, which brought about such conclusions and to which the Court of First Instance did not refer in the gist of what really occured; (3) the Court of First Instance erred because when one looks at the overall evidence, as a whole, this certainly was not a misunderstanding, which began, continued or led to tragic conclusions affecting the health of the said David Farrugia and that no account was taken of the lies, the clear and manifest inconsistencies which emerged at the trial stage and thus the Court erred unjustly against David Farrugia.

Therefore the appellant is humbly asking this Honourable Court of Appeal to uphold this present appeal by annulling and revoking the judgment pronounced on the 17th October 2024, in the names of David Farrugia vs Carmine di Ciccio and decide this appeal by upholding the plaintiff’s demands whilst dismissing all the pleas of the respondent Carmine di Ciccio. Saving the oral pleadings that the appellant wishes to make at the stage of the proceedings in this present Appeal. With costs of both instances to be borne by the respondent Carmine di Ciccio.

Notification: Carmine di Ciccio – 50, Triq Mikiel Abela, Birżebbuġac/o Dr. Mario Mifsud – Courts of Justice of Malta.

DR FRANCO BONDIN LLD, M.Jur.

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals

By means of a decree given by the Civil Court (Constitutional jurisdiction), First Hall, on the 2nd March, 2026, in the records of Sworn application number 192/2024CG, in the names: Annabelle Bonello et vs the State Advocate et the following publication was ordered, in terms of Article 187 et sequitur of Chapter 12, for the purpose of service of the respondent.

By means of an application in the names: Annabelle Bonello (404470M) et vs the State Advocate et filed in the Civil Court, First Hall (Constitutional jurisdiction), on the 17th April, 2024, the applicant asked this Honourable Court to:

1. Declare that for the reasons explained, and for those resulting in the proof, that Chapter 69 of the Laws of Malta, the amendments of Act X of 2009, and especially Article 1531C of Chapter 16, violate and/or violate the fundamental rights of the applicants as sanctioned in Article 1 of Protocol No 1 of the European Convention;

2. Declare consequently that, Chapter 69 of the Laws of Malta, the amendments of Act X of 2009, and especially Article 1531C of Chapter 16 are null and without effect, erga omnes, or against the lease between the parties;

3. Grant all remedies deemed appropriate;

4. Declare that the State Advocate is responsible for the damages suffered by the applicants due to the loss of control, use and enjoyment of the property de quo, and the compensation due to them, and liquidate the compensation/damages to be paid to the applicants, and order the State Advocate to pay that sum so liquidated

5. Give all necessary remedial and/or other provisions;

With all costs and legal interests against the respondent who is from now summoned so that a reference to his evidence be made

The Sworn application number 192/2024CG in the names mentioned above is postponed to the 2nd July, 2026, at 11.30 a.m.

Notification respondent:

Alfred Caruana (944547M), 158, Triq id-Dejma, Ħal Tarxien

Joan Antida Caruana (829555M), 158, Triq id-Dejma, Ħal Tarxien

GABRIEL MANGION

For the Registrar, Civil Courts and Tribunals