The widow of a fisherman who lost his life in the Simshar tragedy has lodged an appeal from a court judgment that had upheld her inlaws' request for her to be evicted from the house she had shared with her husband.
Stefania Carabott filed her application of appeal against Giuseppe and Doris Carabott, the parents of her late husband Noel. She explained that last month the First Hall of the Civil Court had refused to allow her to contest the application for eviction filed against her. The court had ordered her to vacate the farmhouse within four months.
But Ms Carabott requested the revocation of the judgment on procedural grounds and because she claimed that she had a title at law to occupy the farmhouse.
According to Ms Carabott, her inlaws' application for eviction did not contain a legally necessary declaration that as far as they knew she had no grounds on which to contest their action. According to Ms Carabott, the lack of this declaration rendered the application invalid.
The inlaws had also declared that Stefania and Noel Carabott had occupied the farmhouse, which Mr and Mrs Carabott leased from the Joint Office, without a valid title. But, Ms Carabott declared that her inlaws had specifically told the court that they had allowed their son and his wife to live in the farmhouse. This meant that therefore it was not true to say that Ms Carabott had no legal title to the property.
Ms Carabott added that she had her husband had spent a lot of money to refurbish the farmhouse. She called upon the Court of Appeal to revoke the first court's judgment and to allow her to contest her inlaws' application for her eviction.
The widow of a seaman who lost his life in the Simshar tragedy yesterday lodged an appeal from a court judgment that had upheld her inlaws' request for her to be evicted from the house she had shared with her husband.
Stefania Carabott filed her application of appeal against Giuseppe and Doris Carabott, the parents of her late husband Noel. She explained that last month the First Hall of the Civil Court had refused to allow her to contest the application for eviction filed against her. The court had ordered her to vacate the farmhouse within four months.
But Ms Carabott requested the revocation of the judgment on procedural grounds and because she claimed that she had a title at law to occupy the farmhouse.
According to Ms Carabott, her inlaws' application for eviction did not contain a legally necessary declaration for Mr and Mrs Carabott had not declared that as far as they knew Stefania Carabott had no grounds on which to contest their action. The lack of this declaration rendered the application invalid according to Ms Carabott.
The inlaws had also declared that Stefania and Noel Carabott had occupied the farmhouse, which Mr and Mrs Carabott leased from the Joint Office, without a valid title. But, Ms Carabott declared that her inlaws had specifically told the court that they had allowed their son and his wife to live in the farmhouse. This meant that therefore it was not true to say that Ms Carabott had no legal title to the property.
Ms Carabott added that she had her husband had spent a lot of money in order to refurbish the farmhouse. She conlcuded by calling upon the Court of Appeal to revoke the first court's judgment and to allow her to contest her inlaws' application for her eviction.
Lawyers Patrick Valentino and Kris Busietta acted for Ms Carabott.