Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1519405
12 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 21 APRIL 2024 LETTERS & LAW Letters to the Editor Law Report Swieqi residents are worried ALL the residents of Swieqi are very worried about the current situation where there are a number of suspicious individuals roaming around our streets, taking photos of doors and windows of residences, and entering private gardens and drive-ins. This does not appear to be an isolated case, because these individuals have been seen more than once visiting various streets ob- serving the daily movements of our residents. This is apart from the fact that the local council was informed of break-ins in private residences in recent weeks. As a council, we are asking central government to give the disciplined forces the much-needed resources, with immediate effect, so that the security of residents will be assured. It is not acceptable that our residents live in fear for their safety in their own homes. Swieqi Local Council Use unbuilt plots for parking PARKING is an issue in many localities, especially those where blocks of apart- ments have replaced terraced houses. I believe that government should create a scheme whereby owners of unbuilt infill sites rent out these plots to the respec- tive local councils on condition these are turned into temporary open-air car parks for residents until they decide to build them up. The council can then charge a nominal fee for parking. Such a scheme will definitely alleviate the parking prob- lem in some areas. Additionally, some of these plots can be purchased by local councils to be turned into permanent two-storey underground carparks with a community garden on top. D. Grech Marsaskala Avoiding a tit-for- tat in the Middle East IRAN'S missile and drone attack on Israel was despicable and in breach of international law. The fact that it only caused one casualty was only down to the impeccable air defence systems Isra- el deployed and the support it received from US, British, French and Jordanian fighter jets that helped down some of the missiles before they reached Israel. However, it would be an even bigger mistake now if Israel were to retaliate. After all, this all started because Israel bombed the Iranian consulate in Syria, which was also in breach of internation- al conventions that protect diplomatic missions from aggression. Western powers should pressure Israel not to en- ter into a tit-for-tat with Iran that risks dragging the region into all-out war. Going down this dangerous road only distracts everyone from the plight of the Palestinians and the urgent need for a ceasefire in Gaza. This appears to be Benjamin Netanayahu's game, given his unpopularity among Israelis; the west should not be complicit in it. P. Said Birzebbuga THE Court has ruled that the Plaintiff of the case is to appoint a representative if they do not ordinarily reside in Malta. This was held in Anthony Dervan and Michelle Dervan vs Mark Critchley and Marie Louise Critchley on 16 April 2024. The judgment was delivered by the First Hall of the Civil Court presided by Judge Doreen Clarke. The Plaintiffs filed a sworn application concerning a dividing wall between the properties of both Parties and the con- struction of a room on one of the roofs. The Plaintiffs held that the construction on the roof was contrary to law. The Defendants pointed out in their statement of defence that the Plaintiffs are not ordinarily resident in Malta and as a consequence they should be repre- sented in these proceedings. The De- fendants filed other pleas, however, this judgment is limited to this plea of lack of representation of the Plaintiffs. The Court in its judgment looked at the facts of this plea and held that An- thony Dervan was present when the sworn application was filed in court and it was him who confirmed the applica- tion on oath. He was also present in the first two sittings in court. However, from the evidence it shows that the Dervans are ordinarily resident in Ireland. The Defendants argue that in this case the Plaintiffs should be represented. It was also argued that it would be impossible for them to notify the Plaintiffs, if they do not live in Malta. The Plaintiffs argued that the law does not impose that they should be con- stantly in Malta. As to notification of any acts, these may be done by means of the European Union Regulations or else their lawyer may be notified. The Plaintiffs in their submissions quoted from ESA Asset Management SRL vs Solutions & Infrastructure Ser- vices Limited decided on 17 Novem- ber 2020 by the First Hall of the Civil Courts. In this judgment, the Court held that this was discussed in two previous cas- es. In these rulings, the Plaintiff was not present when the lawsuit was instituted. In one of the cases, the Court declared the acts null in terms of Article 180(1) (a) of the Code of Organisation and Civ- il Procedure. The main issue was not whether he should have been present when the acts were filed in Court but whether the Plaintiff should have been present in Malta during the proceedings. The second case was a retrial case before the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal dealt with the issue on when the Plain- tiff is absent from Malta during the pro- ceedings. The Court in this judgment had quoted from judgments in Castelli and Zealand, where it was held that presence during the proceedings is required. In other judgments, it was held that the Parties' presence during the proceedings is not required and presence is just a custom. The Court quoted from Zealand Hold- ings Inc vs The Bank Esteru Amsterdam Trade Bank NV decided on 29 April 2014 by the First Hall of the Civil Court. In this sentence, the court held that if a Party is not present in Malta, he or she should appoint a representative who can appear instead of him/her. If there is no representative, this does not make the acts null. On the other hand, this does not mean that the case can continue to proceed. The law allows the Court to appoint curators to represent a defendant. The need of the presence, even in the form of a representative, is necessary in or- der to assure that the acts are correct and that the rights and the obligations of the Parties are observed. If there is no representation the proceedings may be annulled. This position was explained in Hannah Harris vs Anthony Spiteri decided on 7 October 2014. The Court said that pres- ence or representation is required irre- spective of notification and execution of judgment in terms of the EU regulation. In view of this, the Court moved to order that the Plaintiff regularise their position in these proceedings. Parties in lawsuits living abroad must be represented in the proceedings LAW REPORT MALCOLM MIFSUD Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates If there is no representative, this does not make the acts null. On the other hand, this does not mean that the case can continue to proceed.