A woman was yesterday awarded €60,000 in compensation by the Constitutional Court, which found she had not been adequately compensated by the Government for the use of her property by sitting tenants.

Angela Balzan had filed a constitutional application against the Prime Minister, the (then) Minister for Home Affairs and Justice, the Attorney General and Brian and Cecilia Bajada.

She told the court that in 1972 she had acquired a flat in St Julian’s that was subject to a temporary emphyteusis. The whole block of flats had been granted on temporary emphyteusis to the British Forces in 1957 and the emphyteusis was to expire in June 2002.

Although the British Forces had offered to release the entire block to its various owners, the Government had intervened and had acquired the block free of charge from the British Forces in 1977.

The Government originally leased the block of flats to Holiday Services Co. Ltd for use as holiday flats. In August 1983 it allowed the company to transfer the flats to Maltese nationals by title of temporary sub-emphyteusis for the remaining period of the emphyteutical grant.

Ms Balzan said that in November 1984 the Bajadas had purchased the temporary sub-ground rent of the flat she owned from Holiday Services Co. Ltd.

When the emphyteutical grant expired in June 2002 the Bajadas had not vacated the property because they claimed they were protected tenants in terms of the Housing Decontrol Ordinance, which allowed them to convert their temporary emphyteutical grant to a title of lease.

Ms Balzan said this violated her fundamental human right to enjoyment of property because she was not allowed to resume possession of the flat she owned when the emphyteutical grant lapsed.

She also claimed she was being deprived of adequate compensation because the rent payable by the Bajadas amounted to Lm270 a year while she could expect toreceive €7,000 annually on the open market.

Initially the First Hall of the Civil Court found in favour of Ms Balzan.

The Government and the Bajadas appealed to the Constitutional Court, presided over by Chief Justice Silvio Camilleri, Mr Justice Tonio Mallia and Mr Justice Noel Cuschieri.

On appeal, the court said that case law of the European Court of Human Rights had established that the Government had the right to enact laws to control the use of property in the public interest. The changes to the Housing Decontrol Ordinance in 1979, which permitted the conversion of a temporary emphyteusis into a lease, had not been declared to violate human rights.

But the Government had to ensure that legislation enacted in the public interest did not bring about a disproportionate burden on the property owner.

The owner of property being used in the public interest was entitled to adequate and fair compensation for being deprived of his/her property for a social reason.

The Constitutional Court held that the Bajadas were not to blame for Ms Balzan’s being deprived of her property.

The remedy that had to be given to Ms Balzan was adequate compensation to give her just satisfaction and to strike a fair balance.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.