The law requires the SPRL itself to identify which of these specific categories is the landlord`s responsibility and that it be accompanied by a document that proves it. In the absence of any of these requirements, the contract would be considered LPRL. Any lease that claims to be a SPRL, but has a duration of more than six (6) months, is also considered LPRL. In addition, there appears to be a gap with respect to clauses to regulate expenses that may relate to invoices from Internet/TV service providers and other similar costs. Clauses that do not reflect the actual consumption of electricity and water bills or that do not regulate rent, deposit, insurance and common sharing contributions are prohibited by law. So how can we regulate these expenditures? Are the parties free to enter into separate private agreements to regulate them? Once again, legislative changes will be made to allow tenants and landlords to be informed of these situations. Another concern that could be pointed out is that it is an end to a non-renewable LPRL. The law provides that in the absence of notification from the lessor to the lessor (at least three (3) months before the termination date, the LPRL will be extended by a period of twelve (12) months. This requirement is part of the scope of a non-renewable contract, in which non-compliance with the termination would lead to an extension to which both parties have not consented. So what? There are sufficient judgments on “consent” to the writing of several theses, but for this guide, suffice it to say that there are a number of judgments that have made it clear that consent to an agreement must be given freely or voluntarily and that it corresponds to the intention of the party. Permission is challenged when it is given in error and our courts have repeatedly declared agreements that, with the agreement of one or more parties, were wrong, null and void. While it is understandable that the law was developed with the intention of restoring the balance between landlords and tenants, which has been lost over the years, as was found at the beginning of this guide, this clause was developed in a vacuum of problem-solving or reaching a scope, without taking into account the much broader picture of Maltese law and jurisprudence.
It has been thoughtless and thoughtless and we hope that it will be duly revised with all other clauses allowing for interpretation. The Private Residential Leases Act (“Chapter 604 of Maltese Laws”) was developed in a way that provides for a greater bias in favour of tenants vis-à-vis landlords. This is what Parliament is doing to try to intervene in a rental market that is perceived to be perceived to it, where rent prices soar over a relatively short period of time.