Three siblings won a total of €35,500 from the European Court of Human Rights over a Valletta property they inherited from their father which was being rented for a pittance.

Franco Buttigieg, Maria Borg Costanzi and Alessandra Kirkpatrick had argued that an emphyteutical concession entered into on August 4, 1981, violated their fundamental human rights.

To date, the Constitutional Court and the First Hall of the Civil Court of Malta had decided that once parties entered into an agreement post 1979, they knew the consequences of Act XXIII of 1979.

The ECHR has differed with the Constitutional Court’s interpretation and also considers these deeds post-1979 as running counter to the fundamental human rights of landlords.

The plaintiffs were on Tuesday awarded €22,000 in pecuniary damages, €4,500 in non-pecuniary damages and €9,000 in legal costs.

Plaintiffs were represented by Dr Edward DeBono and Dr Michael Camilleri, and Dr Peter Grech on behalf of Government and Dr Joseph Brincat on behalf of tenants.

Facts of the case:

• The applicants are the owners of apartment no. 3 at 94, Melita Street, Valletta. This apartment was inherited by the applicants from their father, who died in September 2006.

• Initially, the apartment belonged to the applicants’ late father and his brothers. On August 4, 1981, the late father of the applicants and his brothers entered into a contract granting a temporary emphyteusis for 17 years to couple S.

• The temporary emphyteusis was to commence on August 12, 1981 and the ground rent to be paid was set at Lm120 (around €280 annually). The next revision of the rent was scheduled for 2013 and the rent then would be €568.06.

• In 1988, one of the co-owners had taken legal action to collect arrears of ground rent for 11 years and to evict couple S. By a judgment of the Court of Appeal (civil jurisdiction) of May 27, 1992, couple S. was ordered to pay the arrears; however, the court did not order their eviction.

• According to the applicants, in 1992, their late father had entered into negotiations with couple S., in order to reach a new lease agreement and increase the rent. Couple S. did not accept the terms of the new lease and did not pay outstanding arrears.

• On October 17, 1994, a deed of partition was signed by the siblings and the apartment in question was assigned in its entirety to the late father of the applicants.

• On August 11, 1998 the temporary emphyteusis came to an end. Nevertheless, couple S. continued to occupy the apartment by title of lease since the law provided for the conversion of a temporary emphyteusis into a lease, irrespective of the owners’ consent. As a result, couple S. could in practice reside indefinitely in the applicants’ premises.

• The rent was far less than the rental market value of the apartment. According to a report of an ex-parte architect drawn up on January 25, 2011, the market value of the apartment at the time was €125,000.