Owners seek Constitutional redress after court refuses to evict tenant

The owners of a residence in Hamrun claim their right to enjoy their property was violated, when the Civil Court refused to evict their tenant

Three owners of a residence in Hamrun filed a constitutional application, claiming the right to enjoy their property was violated because a tenant is residing in their property without legal claim.

The case concerns a house in Farsons Street, Hamrun, owned by Emanuel Aquilina, Rita Aquilina and Rose Calleja. The residence was given on temporary emphyteusis for 21 years to the a certain Joseph Gatt. However when the tenant passed away, the emphyteusis was not converted to rent, yet Gatt’s daughter Carmen remained living in the property.

The three owners filed a civil claim requesting the eviction of the tenant as she had no legal claim to the residence. On 23 October last year, Mr Justice Joseph Azzopardi rejected the request. The applicants appealed but on 1 April the Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the first court, ruling the appeal was frivolous and vexatious.  

Commenting to MaltaToday, the applicant’s lawyer argued that the Court of Appeal wrongly decreed that a constitutional reference was frivolous and vexatious because the applicant had not utilised ordinary means of redress.

“That Court had no power to do such an examination of a constitutional reference. While the Court could rule the application as frivolous, this could not be applied on the basis that the applicant had not sought ordinary redress”, Dr Gatt said.

Fearing their right to enjoy their property ebbing away from them, the owners filed a constitutional application. The applicants argued they could not exercise their right of use of their property in terms of physical possession as the house was occupied by the tenants and the lease could not be terminated.

“While the applicants remain owners of the property, they are subjected to a forced landlord-tenant relationship for an indefinite period of time, without an effective remedy enabling them to evict the tenants.The law itself lacks adequate procedural safeguards aimed at achieving a balance between the interests of the tenants and those of the owners”, the application read.

The three owners requested the court rule that their right to enjoy their property was violated, order the immediate eviction of the tenants and order the owners compensation in view of their violated rights.

Lawyers David Camilleri and Joseph Gatt signed the constitutional application.