From the bench: Time to sell

The remedy of a forceful sale of a property co-owned by persons who disagree with their property’s fate as provided for by article Article 495A of the Civil Code is not new to this series. Today’s article delves into further actions available to co-owners who feel that such judgments in favour of major co-owners impinge on their right to property.

Most co-owners in cases like the one discussed here end up in a state of co-ownership through inheritance. In a judgment delivered on February 1 (Ref 349/15/1 RGM), the Court of Appeal stated that there is no doubt that such a law had been promulgated specifically to address and target situations relating to properties owned by co-owners who disagree about the fate of their property and who wish to terminate their state of co-ownership. 

On July 15, 2021, the First Hall of the Civil Court decided in favour of the sale as desired by the plaintiffs, who owned six undivided parts of seven properties in Marsascala which they had inherited, and thus co-owned. The defendant, who owned the remaining one part of the seven of the undivided share, opposed the sale, stating that it had been her parents’ wish that the properties remain in the family.