Court finds Cap. 199 agricultural tenancy law violated owner's peaceful enjoyment of property, awarding €57,367 compensation for period 1987–2015.
Civil Court - First Hall (Constitutional Jurisdiction) · Honourable Judge Dr Joanne Vella Cuschieri B.A., Mag. Jur. (EUR. LAW.), LL.D. · 6 May 2026
Carmela Gatt brought a constitutional application against the Attorney General (Avukat tal-Istat) claiming that provisions of the Agricultural Leases (Renewal) Act, Chapter 199 of the Laws of Malta, had violated her fundamental right to peaceful enjoyment of property under Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), as incorporated into Maltese law through Chapter 319. Gatt had inherited approximately 9,840 square metres of agricultural land known as 'Tax-Xarrijah' in Rabat, Malta, from her mother Nazzarena Gauci who died in October 2006. The land had been continuously leased to the Busuttil family since at least 1975 for the derisory sum of Lm12.71 per year (equivalent to €29.61), a rate wholly divorced from open-market rental values. Gatt donated the land to her daughter Maria Lourdes Galea in April 2015, limiting her claim to the period from May 1987 to April 2015. The State Attorney raised two preliminary objections: first, that Gatt lacked legal interest (locus standi) having transferred the property without reservation; and second, that she had failed to prove title and that the tenancy was regulated by Cap. 199. The court rejected both objections, relying on Constitutional Court precedent holding that patrimonial rights arising from a fundamental rights breach are personal to the victim and do not transfer automatically with the property. On the merits, the court declared that Articles 3, 4 and 14 of Cap. 199 — which froze rent, blocked lease termination except on rigid grounds, and nullified any contractual terms more favourable to the tenant — imposed a disproportionate burden on the owner without fair compensation, breaching Article 1 of Protocol 1 ECHR. This finding was consistent with a long line of Maltese and Strasbourg jurisprudence including Amato Gauci v. Malta (2009) and J&C Properties Limited v. Nazzareno Pulis et (Constitutional Court, 2020). Applying the valuation methodology from Cauchi v. Malta (ECtHR, 2021) and using the expert report of Technical Expert Alexei Pace, the court calculated the open-market rental value over the relevant period at €94,993, applied a 30% deduction for the legitimate aim of the legislation and a further 20% deduction for rental uncertainty, then subtracted the rent actually received (€829.08), arriving at pecuniary damages of €52,367. Non-pecuniary (moral) damages were fixed at €5,000, producing a total award of €57,367, with legal interest from judgment date to payment. Costs were charged entirely to the State.
Carmela Gatt awarded total compensation of €57,367 (€52,367 pecuniary + €5,000 non-pecuniary/moral damages) payable by the Avukat tal-Istat (Attorney General), with legal interest from date of judgment until effective payment. All costs charged to the Avukat tal-Istat. Court ordered notification of the decision to the Speaker of the Maltese Parliament. All objections of the Avukat tal-Istat dismissed.
Cap. 199 (Agricultural Leases Renewal Act) Arts. 3, 4, 14; Article 1 of the First Protocol ECHR (Cap. 319); Article 37 of the Constitution of Malta