The State has been ordered to pay more than €143,000 in compensation to the owner of a Fgura property which was requisitioned almost 60 years ago and has since been used as a police station and, until recently, a government health clinic.

The First Hall of the Civil Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction found that the woman's fundamental property rights had been breached, ruling that the rent she received bore little relation to the property's rental value and failed to strike a fair balance between her rights as owner and the public interest.

The court awarded the owner €143,245.03 in compensation, to be paid jointly by the State Advocate and Housing Authority within one month. The sum consists of €132,445.03 in pecuniary damages and a further €10,800 in non-pecuniary damages.

The case concerns a two-storey property in Triq Hompesch, Fgura, which was acquired by the woman's father in 1945. The property was requisitioned by the government in 1966 and was later leased for £70 a year. The woman became the owner of the property in 1983, after it was transferred to her by her parents.

Part of the building was used as the Fgura police station, while another part operated as a government peripheral clinic.

The owner argued that she had effectively been deprived of the enjoyment of her property for decades without receiving adequate compensation, in breach of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights.

Property requisitioned but never used for housing

Evidence presented in the proceedings showed that the woman's father had repeatedly attempted to recover the property after it was requisitioned.

The court heard that he had asked for the requisition order to be withdrawn, including the fact that the property had been used as a store for his business. Those requests were rejected.

He had also informed the authorities that his daughter was preparing to marry and that he needed the property for her.

Although the property had been requisitioned for the purposes of social accommodation, it was never used for that purpose. Instead, it was used as a police station and government clinic.

It was noted that even legal advice available at the time had indicated that using a requisition order to take a property which was not intended for social housing was not advisable.

Nevertheless, the Housing Secretary ultimately issued the order following pressure from the police commissioner and health authorities, with the court observing that the owner and her family had consequently been dispossessed of the property for decades.

The requisition order remains in force.

Government clinic stopped using property in 2020

The health authorities stopped using their section of the property in 2020.

The primary health financial controller told the court that rent had been paid on the property from June 1968 until March 2020, with the department paying a total of just €2,729 over that period.

He said the department stopped paying rent because it was no longer using the property, adding that the keys were left at the Fgura police station.

The police, however, continue to occupy part of the building.

A police representative told the court that records showed €64 was being paid every three months for the property. The owner had informed the authorities that she was refusing the rent because she considered it far too low and unrepresentative of the property's market rental value.

Potential rental income of almost €240,000

A court-appointed architect estimated that the property could have generated approximately €239,675 in rental income between 30 April 1987 and December 2023.

The court contrasted this with approximately €7,305 in rent offered to the owner during that period, of which she had actually accepted only €1,773.

The court said the figures demonstrated an evident imbalance between the owner's private interests and the public purpose for which the property had been used.

The court also observed that requisitioning the property for it to pass into government hands was not an appropriate means through which the property should have been taken from its private owner.

In calculating compensation, the court started from the estimated €239,675 in rental income before deducting 30% to account for the legitimate aim and general interest behind the law.

A further 20% was deducted to reflect the fact that there was no guarantee the property would have remained rented throughout the entire period at the estimated market rates. The rent actually received was also deducted.

This resulted in €132,445.03 in pecuniary compensation.

The court awarded another €10,800 in moral damages, calculated at €300 for every year of the violation.

It said the owner and her family had suffered prejudice because she had been forced to find an alternative home in which to live during her marriage, while despite being the property's owner she had neither possessed it nor received a realistic return from it for decades.

Police cannot continue relying on requisition law

The court declared that the continuing lease of the property in favour of the government breached the owner's rights under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the European Convention.

It ruled that, since the original requisition order remains in force, it was the provisions of the Housing Act which gave rise to the violation in this case.

Significantly, the court also declared that the Lands Authority and Commissioner of Police could no longer rely on the Housing Act to continue occupying the property, noting that the health authorities no longer occupied any part of it.

The State Advocate and Housing Authority were held jointly responsible for paying the owner €143,245.03, with interest running from the date of the judgment until payment.

The court ordered that the money be paid within one month.

It also ordered 75% of the costs of proceedings to be borne jointly by the State Advocate and Housing Authority, while the owner must bear the remaining 25%.

Judge Lawrence Mintoff presided over the court.