Court rejects Abbazia’s constitutional challenge over Nadur land deregistration

The First Hall of the Civil Court has ruled the government’s legislative intervention to deregister vast tracts of land in Nadur was a proportionate measure serving the “general interest,” despite evidence of political pressure on the Land Registry.

In a judgment delivered on Thursday, the Court dismissed all claims brought by the Abbazia di Sant’ Antonio delli Navarra against the State Advocate, the Minister for Lands, and the Land Registrar. The court found that the deregistration of the land, facilitated by a 2021 amendment to the Land Registration Act, did not violate the Abbazia’s fundamental rights to property, a fair hearing, or an effective remedy.

The case concerned two large portions of land in Nadur, Gozo, known as “Iċ-Ċens tan-Nadur,” measuring 13,465sq.m and 12,580sq.m respectively.

In 2020, after Nadur was declared a compulsory registration area, the Abbazia, represented by Rector Patrick Valentino, who has recently been appointed magistrate, successfully registered the land in its name.

The registration relied on a 1675 foundation deed written in Latin, together with a contract signed in 2017.

READ ALSO | Why Gozitans are scared of losing their homes to a 17th century fiefdom

The registration triggered what the Abbazia described as a “pandemonium” and a “campaign in the media” by residents who occupied the land.

The Land Registrar, Claude Sapiano, testified that the situation “exploded,” with up to 100 people at a time gathering outside the Land Registry in Gozo to protest the fairness of the registrations.

Allegations of political interference

Testimony during the proceedings showed institutional pressure surrounding the decision to deregister the land. Sapiano testified he received calls from the office of the Parliamentary Secretary and held meetings with then-Parliamentary Secretary Alex Muscat.

He stated that while the word “fraud” was mentioned during these meetings, it remained a “purely abstract concept” as no evidence of criminal activity was provided to him.

READ ALSO | Gozo lands claimed by Abbazia ‘deregistered in public interest’

Sapiano further admitted his superiors expected him to “solve it and remove that registration,” but he insisted on following normal procedures. He testified that Article 16B of the Land Registration Act, which granted the Minister the power to cancel registration orders, was passed as a “repercussion of what happened in Nadur.”

The court also heard testimony from Marlin Vella, the former Assistant Registrar in Gozo, who had originally approved the Abbazia’s registration requests.

Vella claimed he was “persecuted” and “targeted” by politicians on social media, including Chris Said, before eventually being transferred to Malta under the guise of “exigencies of the service”.

He later resigned. Superintendent Hubert Cini confirmed a police investigation remains open regarding the registration of these lands and Vella’s involvement.

Judicial findings on property and public interest

The Abbazia argued the introduction of Article 16B and the subsequent Legal Notice 73 of 2022 constituted an “arbitrary legislative action” intended to favour private individuals for political gain prior to a general election.

However, the court found the Abbazia did not yet possess a “guaranteed title,” as the law requires a ten-year period from the initial registration to pass without challenge.

The court pointed out several residents had filed cautions (kawzjonijiet) against the Abbazia’s title, which would have frozen the ten-year period in any case, regardless of the legislative amendment.

Regarding the right to property under Article 1 of the First Protocol, the court ruled that the deregistration served a “legitimate aim in the general interest.”

The court held: “The measure was also intended to safeguard the interest and homes of the residents in the indicated zone... so that the rights of all those involved, not only the Abbazija, are scrutinised and decided by the Courts of Justice and not by a simple registration.”

The court added the “absolute balance” between individual rights and the community’s needs was maintained because the Abbazia remains free to prove its title through ordinary civil proceedings, such as an actio rei vindicatoria.

Rejection of procedural claims

The court dismissed the claim of a breach of Article 6 which protects the right to a fair hearing, on the basis that the administrative act of deregistration did not amount to a final determination of civil rights. 

Claims of discrimination under Article 14 were also rejected, as no evidence was produced to show the measure treated people in similar situations differently.

The provisions applied equally to anyone who had registered land in the affected areas.

The court concluded the “fair balance that must be struck between the demands of the general interest of the community and the requirements of the protection of the individual’s fundamental rights” had not been upset.

All of the Abbazia di Sant’ Antonio delli Navarra’s requests were rejected, including the demand to declare Article 16B null and the request to re-insert the titles into the Land Register.

All legal costs were ordered to be borne by the Abbazia.

Judge Joanne Vella Cuschieri presided over the case.