Kappara flyover tenants who wanted hefty compensation sent packing

A Court of Appeal has rejected a request to expunge a court decision that radically trimmed down compensation for a restaurateur when the property was expropriated for the construction of the Kappara flyover in 2015.

Originally the Calleja family, which ran The Cottage restaurant, had won 12% of the €835,000 in damages that were paid to the actual property owners after the Maltese government expropriated the land for the construction of the Kappara flyover in Gżira.

The Calleja family had been the tenants operating The Cottage since 1988. In July 2015, eyeing the land for the €39 million EU-funded flyover, the government offered landowner Eugenio Bartolo €835,000 for the 335sq.m property to take possession of the land.

The Callejas also requested compensation, and were offered just €12,762; they contended they were entitled to €200,400 – a sum calculated as an annual 12% of the €835,000 value of the property for two years.

Since the Callejas were only tenants of the property, so upon appeal by the Lands Authority, a court trimmed down their request to €89,000 – the rental value calculated up to 2028, the year their lease would be terminated.

But an attempt to have that decision cancelled was turned down by a Court of Appeal presided by Chief Justice Mark Chetcuti, who lambasted the family’s attempt to claw back the monies they claim they were entitled to.

According to the court decision, the Callejas paid a rent of around €6,300-€7,200 annually for the property up to the contract’s expiry.

“This complaint is manifestly wrong, if not futile. This Court would never put the Calleja family, as tenants of the expropriated property, on level pegging as the owners of the property – it has to be mercifully stated that, if the owners were entitled to €835,000 in expropriation damages, the tenants surely could not expect the same with just 13 years left to the expiry of the lease,” the Court said. “The compensation for a 13-year rental cannot be compared to the compensation expected by the owner of the property, especially when the Callejas presented no evidence of loss of business during the expropriation.”

The Callejas lost the appeal and ordered to pay €800 in court expenses.