A buyer suing the sellers on a multi-property deal that failed to reach the final contract stage twenty years ago was ordered instead to compensate them to the tune of over €1 million in damages.

That court decision stemmed from a legal dispute which dated back to 2004 when the purchaser, Olive Gardens Investments Limited, filed a civil lawsuit against Charles and James Sant Fournier on the basis of a promise of sale that was due to expire on November 15 of that year.

In terms of that agreement signed in May 2003, the sellers jointly bound themselves to transfer their one-third undivided share in 14 urban properties and ten rural tenements located in various parts of the island.

The sale was also to include ground rents accruing to the sellers on various other properties in Sliema, Cospicua, Ħamrun, Birkirkara, Balzan, Naxxar and St Julian’s.

On November 12, 2004, the buyer filed a judicial letter against the sellers, calling upon them to finalize the sale.

They subsequently filed a civil lawsuit in December to force the sale or seek damages from the sellers who, they claimed, were not in a position to honour their obligations on the promise of sale.

But the sellers rebutted those claims.

Sant Fournier argued that they had always been willing to proceed with the sale and had even filed a judicial letter against the purchaser to do likewise. But the purchaser had been evasive, always coming up with some excuse.

When the company filed that judicial letter to force the sale, it was acting in bad faith, the sellers claimed.

And not only did Sant Fournier rebut the buyer’s claims but they also filed a counter-claim seeking damages against Olive Gardens Investments Ltd.

The sellers argued that the buyer had filed that judicial letter simply to secure the validity and thus enforceability of the promise of sale, following it up with the lawsuit without ever intending to go ahead with the final deed.

Pending the litigation, Charles Sant Fournier passed away and his successors in title stepped into the proceedings in his stead.

Meanwhile, a partial judgment handed down a few years ago threw out the buyer’s request to force the sale and to retrieve damages unless that sale materialized.

That judgment also declared that the buyer had failed to step forward and thus the sellers were not bound to sell.

The court upheld the sellers’ claim for damages resulting from the buyer’s “abusive behaviour.”

In light of affidavits presented by the sellers, the First Hall, Civil Court, presided over by Mr Justice Toni Abela, observed that certain debts incurred by the sellers throughout the years were not “directly and immediately” related to the promise of sale.

However, it was clear that they had been “unjustly deprived” of the price which should have been paid years ago, namely on November 25, 2004, had the company kept its word.

Since the sellers were denied that capital, they were at least entitled to the interest which would have accrued from the date of the final deed.

The Civil Code states that in such circumstances interests are to run from the date when the contract should have been signed up to the date of a court decision on the matter or the date when the debtor settles the amount due.

This sale was a commercial transaction for the price of Lm310,000 equivalent to €722,300.

The interest rate was 8% per annum.

Thus the global value of accrued interest amounted to €1,146,049.33 which the court ordered the company to pay to the sellers or the heirs in equal portions.

Lawyers Mario de Marco and Margo Zammit Fiorentino assisted James Sant Fournier.

Lawyers Joseph Schembri, Jose' Herrera and David Camilleri assisted the heirs of Charles Sant Fournier.