Court orders Housing Authority to pay €21,000 in compensation
A court has ordered the Housing Authority to pay €21,000 to a property owner after concluding that the owner's right to peaceful possession of his property had been violated.
Louis Apap Bologna filed his constitutional application before Mr Justice Joseph Zammit McKeon in the First Hall of the Civil Court against Calcidon Ciantar, the authority and the Attorney General. The court ruled that the Attorney General was not a party to the suit.
The court heard that Mr Apap Bologna owned a property in Gzira and that it had been requisitioned in 1976 and allocated to a certain Peter Sheehan.
However, in 1987 Mr Apap Bologna discovered that Mr Ciantar was living in the property without title. The authority then requisitioned the property for a second time and allocated it to Mr Ciantar.
Mr Apap Bologna told the court that he had not been compensated for the deprivation of his property and that his fundamental human right to peaceful enjoyment of his property had been violated.
In its judgment, the court pointed out that Mr Ciantar was disabled and lived on social benefits and that the state was entitled to requisition property to fulfil its social functions. The requisition order had not therefore been capricious or unjustified.
However, the burden laid on Mr Apap Bologna was disproportionate and excessive for no fair balance had been struck between the needs of the community and the protection of the owner's human rights.
The court ruled that there were no grounds to overturn the requisition order and to order that the property revert to Mr Apap Bologna.
However, Mr Apap Bologna was entitled to compensation for the violation of his human rights.
The Housing Authority was ordered to pay Mr Apap Bologna €21,000 in compensation.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
18 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Alfred Fenech
Jul 16th 2011, 10:47
Thats good news but must it be at TAXPAYERs expence.
riccardo borg
Jul 15th 2011, 18:01
How's this?
My father owned a flat which was requisitioned. The tenants did not care about the maintenance of the roof. The roof needed repair. The tenants moved out to their new house but handed the key to the Housing. My father, over seventy, was asked to repair the roof. He chose to sell to the Housing Authority.
The price then was Lm666.66 (E 1555.54).
You would expect the Housing to repair the roof and relet the flat to a needy family. Far from it. The flat was auctioned and sold for Lm4,000.00 (E10,000).
How's that for Social Service? Thievery by the Authorities.
Joseph Gaffarena
Jul 15th 2011, 17:54
HALLAS POPLU, minhabba management hazin li hemm f kull korporazzjoni
Mr Joseph Calleja
Jul 15th 2011, 15:06
Has justice finally arrived? Are these properties that were requisitioned in the early 70s finally starting to be returned back to their rightful owner? These properties were taken away, yes they were taken over by squatters at the time because the government in the early seventies (MLP) sanctioned such an unjust law. Any empty property was taken over by the government MLP and assigned to whoever?? No I am not making this up as a matter of fact one of those squatters is still occupying our property in B'Kara. I hope the courts see the light and help us get these properties back. There are a lot of other empty properties for rent so the government or the courts can accommodate these squatters elsewhere and let us get our property back. The present government (PN) only managed to put in a half assed law to help us retrieve these properties. This tenant has been paying LM19 Maltese pounds a year rent since 1974 until a couple of years back and now the law says that they have to pay us 186 euro a year rent for living in this property. In the meantime my family cannot sell or occupy this property. The archaic law of inheriting a rental agreement is unjust and must be corrected by the courts.
Ms Maria Vella
Jul 15th 2011, 14:48
Can someone explain this to me - so, one own's a property and the government can just take it to fulfil social obligations?
Whilst I definitely am not against giving accomodation to those who need it I fail to understand on what basis a property is requisitioned
Mr Joseph Calleja
Jul 15th 2011, 18:17
Yes Ms Vella, that is the way it was done in the seventies, In those days property was requisitioned on politics, pure and simple politics and people like my family are still suffering the consequences. Can you believe that? 34 years later.
Mr Victor Laiviera
Jul 16th 2011, 09:39
@ Mr Joseph Calleja
Like all PN apologist, you have a selective memory.
It happened under may different governments over many decades, Check it out.
Mr Mario P. Sciberras
Jul 15th 2011, 14:36
Somebody should ask in parliament for a list of authorities/foundations currently operating on the maltese islands. This list is to include those entities such as MaltaTransport and similar bodies which do not use authority in their name. What is the total wage bill and consultancy services paid. When were any of these bodies auditied for efficiency and value for money?
What worries me most is that parastatal organisation have been wound up or sold and are now being replaced by now bodies with impressive names and staffed by people of doubtful ability but with the right political alliances.
If the number of people employed by these organisations is added to the number of people working for the government, is employment in the public sector up or down and by how much?
Mr Mario P. Sciberras
Jul 15th 2011, 14:21
Another authority. Another you know what.
Mariella Caruana
Jul 15th 2011, 13:25
great - and the taxpayer foots the bill. what about the civil servants who were instrumental for the requisition order - are they not to blame?
Mario Camilleri
Jul 15th 2011, 13:51
Like.
Mr Victor Laiviera
Jul 15th 2011, 13:56
If Mr Ciantar is disabled, the state is obliged to provide for him, including accommodation.
€21,000 is not a large sum for providing this accommodation since 1987.
The taxpayers got a good deal.
Tarcisio Bonello
Jul 15th 2011, 14:02
No - According to the court....the court pointed out that Mr Ciantar was disabled and lived on social benefits and that the state was entitled to requisition property to fulfil its social functions. The requisition order had not therefore been capricious or unjustified.
We live in a welfare state - Thank God.
Mr Tim Ripard
Jul 15th 2011, 14:11
Mr. Laiviera, the €21,000 is compensation for the violation of human rights - nothing to do with providing the accommodation.
Mr FRANS H SAID
Jul 15th 2011, 14:30
1987 was on the eve of an election!
Mr David Buttigieg
Jul 15th 2011, 15:59
@Tarcisio Bonello,
A welfare state does not mean robbing people of their property does it?
Mr Victor Laiviera
Jul 16th 2011, 09:36
@ Mr F H Said
It could also have been immediately following and election. The specific date was not given.
Mr Victor Laiviera
Jul 16th 2011, 09:43
@ Mr Tim Ripard.
What's in a name. The bottom line is that the state provided accommodation for a disabled person for at least 24 years and now has paid €21,000 for it
I still say the taxpayer got a good deal.