Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1421642
maltatoday | SUNDAY • 24 OCTOBER 2021 18 COMMERCIAL THE Court may rest solely on the plaintiff 's evidence, even if the Defendant gives another ver- sion of events. This was held in Metropolis Development Limit- ed -v- Professor Erik van Egeraat and Erick van Egeraat Beheer BV on 19 October 2021 by the First Hall of the Civil Courts presided by Judge Anna Felice. The plaintiff company asked the court to remove a special privilege and special hypothec which the defendants had regis- tered against it. In the sworn ap- plication the company claimed that these were illegally reg- istered and represented work carried out by an architect on the company's properties. The Company claimed that the de- fendants had set up in its proper- ty and charged the expense to it. The defendants rebutted the claim by stating that the Plain- tiff company had engaged them as architects of projects it had and what they are claiming are fees for professional services given to them. The Court point- ed out that according to Article 2010 and 2022 of the Civil Code a privilege on immoveable prop- erty may be registered for fees of amongst others for architects' fees. Judge Felice also pointed out that the court had two opposing versions from either party. The company's director Galal Ibra- him Husni Bey explained that he had met the architect following an open competition of the com- pany's projects. The parties to this case had discussed a possible joint venture. Since the defend- ant van Egeraat needed a place to stay and work, the company provided him with an apartment. The apartment was furnished, but the defendant asked Husni Bey to purchase more furniture. The expense had to be reduced from his share of the profits. Husni Bey told the court that the expense was high, and the company was receiving the in- voices. The joint venture never materialised. Following this the company received an invoice of over €16,000 from the defendant architect. The sum was in fact 6% of the total cost of the reno- vation of a building owned by the company. The company contest- ed this claim since no construc- tion was carried out in the build- ing and that the defendant spent large amounts of money on the furniture he purchased for his apartment. Furthermore, the defendant did not pay his rent. The compa- ny insisted that it never engaged the defendant to carry out any work. On the other hand the defend- ant held that it was Husni Bey who asked him to come to Malta to work on a number of proper- ties. No agreement was signed between the parties but in April and May 2016 he asked to be paid. The company refused and instead offered to work as a joint venture. At this point, the com- pany offered that the defendant could convert a property into his office and offered to pay for all the furniture. The defendant held that it worked on the interi- or design on one of the buildings and this was approved by Husni Bey himself. The works carried out were extensive and were un- der his direction. The Court held that this case depends on the credibility of the witnesses. It quoted from a judgement Maria Xuereb et -v- Clement Gauci decided by the Court of Appeal on 24 March 2004, which explained that where there is a conflict of versions the court would need to rest of any corroborating evidence and that the plaintiff is bound to prove its case. In Chef Choice Limited -v- Raymond Galea decided on 26 September 2013, the First Hall of the Civil Courts held that the plaintiff must prove its case. The fact that the defendant has a dif- ferent version of the facts, does not mean that the plaintiff did not prove its case. The court is free to rest on the plaintiff's ev- idence. In this case Judge Felice did not deem that the defendant's ver- sion of events as credible. The defendant did not present any documents to substantiate their claim, including invoices while the works were taking place. The Court an email of 16 April 2016 where the defendant confirmed that he is not owed anything from the plaintiff company. The Court has no evidence that the defendants were engaged. An- other fact that the Court took into consideration is that the de- fendant architect was warranted as a Maltese architect in Decem- ber 2016, but is expecting to be paid for work carried out before this fate. The Court then moved to up- hold the plaintiff's claims. It's plaintiff that must prove its case to Court's satisfaction LAW REPORT MALCOLM MIFSUD Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates MACE 2021 officially confirmed as carbon neutral as it prepares for take-off THE Malta Aviation Conference & Expo 2021, an international aviation conference set to take- off on Tuesday 26th October at the Westin Dragonara Hotel, has just been declared as a car- bon neutral event. MACE supports the aviation industry's social responsibility and commitment to a greener future in full respect of the en- vironment. It is in this spirit that MACE organisers wanted to go that extra green mile to make the Malta Aviation Con- ference and Expo carbon neu- tral. Together with our sup- porting partners Carbon Trade Exchange (CTX), MACE has offset 100% of the expected carbon emissions that will be generated through this confer- ence. "MACE will be the first Maltese Aviation Conference which is completely carbon neutral. We are proud of this achievement and hope that it sets the standard for more avi- ation conferences and expos in the future," said Stanley Buge- ja, Joshua Zammit and Jona- than Dalli, Founding Partners of MACE.With all COVID-19 precautions taken, the third edition of the conference is set to welcome participants in hybrid format. While physical tickets for the conference have been sold out, those who have not yet purchased their tick- et and would not like to miss out on the conference's third edition, can still follow by pur- chasing their virtual ticket via mace.aero. For more information, visit https://mace.aero/