Court dismisses firm's claim to damages from tenants

Mr Justice Geoffrey Valenzia in the First Hall of the Civil Court yesterday dismissed a writ of summons filed by a company against two farmers.

The court heard that the company Eliza Co Ltd had filed its writ claiming damages from Angelo and Maria Portelli.

The company claimed that it owned land at Bahrija and was in the process of selling various plots of this land to third parties.

However, defendants were claiming that they were the tenants of the land.

According to the company, whenever it took prospective purchasers to view the land, defendant Mr Portelli was systematically and maliciously disrupting the transactions.

The company therefore requested the court to condemn defendants to make good the damages it had sustained due to loss of sales.

However, defendants pleaded that they were recognised tenants of the land which they farmed.They also denied having caused damages to the company.

The court heard that in June 2001, the company's directors were in Bahrija showing the land to an estate agent. They were negotiating a price of Lm3,000 per tumolo of land.

According to plaintiff company, Mr Portelli had turned up in his car together with two other persons and had started shouting at Anthony Cuschieri, one of the directors. The company's representatives claimed that Mr Portelli had told them to leave the land.

The estate agent told the court that as a result of what had occurred, his client had decided not to buy the land.

However, Mr Portelli denied these claims and added that he had been attacked by the other company director, Generoso Sammut, who was on the site.

According to Mr Portelli he had gone with two other persons to the land to tend to his bee hives.

When Mr Portelli saw Mr Cuschieri on the land, he had asked him what he was doing there.

Mr Cuschieri had been aggressive towards defendant and the latter had left the site after telling Mr Cuschieri that he remembered that Mr Cuschieri had been condemned to one month's imprisonment (though the prison sentence had been revoked on appeal).

As Mr Portelli was leaving the site, Mr Sammut had insulted him and had shouted at him.

At one stage Mr Sammut had attacked Mr Portelli and had torn his shirt.

According to Mr Portelli, Mr Sammut had picked up a stone to throw at defendant but was stopped by one of his companions.

Mr Justice Valenzia declared that the judge in civil proceedings was to pronounce judgment on the basis of the evidence produced, which evidence had to lead the judge to a state of moral certainty, and not a mere possibility.

In this particular case there were two conflicting versions of the facts, but the court declared that it was inclined to believe Mr Portelli's version of the incident. The incident had not occurred when Mr Portelli had confronted Mr Cuschieri, but only when Mr Sammut had intervened.

The court therefore dismissed plaintiff company's claim for damages with costs against the company.