Supreme Court Orders Peter Nygard and Keod Smith to Halt Works at Clifton Bay and Simms Point / Nygard Cay...

Court Halts Peter Nygard Work In Clifton Bay Area

By DANA SMITH

Tribune Staff Reporter

dsmith@tribunemedia.net

THE Coalition to Protect Clifton Bay has won a court ruling halting construction works in the Clifton Bay area by Peter Nygard.

They were also successful in their Supreme Court application to require any dealings between the government, Mr Nygard and Keod Smith regarding Clifton Bay to be made public.

 

The court documents halt works in the Bay area by Mr Nygard and Mr Smith “acting directly or through (their) employees or agents.”

 

Filed before Justice Rhonda Bain, documents say Prime Minister Perry Christie, Deputy Prime Minister Philip ‘Brave’ Davis, and Transport and Aviation Minister Glenys Hanna-Martin must provide the coalition with ‘full and frank disclosure’ of several items.

 

These include copies of any applications or grants of permits, approvals, or leases made by Mr Nygard and Mr Smith in the Clifton Bay area.

 

The Queen and Mr Christie are named as the first respondents, Mr Davis as the second, Ms Hanna-Martin as the third, the Town Planning Committee is listed as the fourth, Mr Nygard as the fifth, and Mr Smith as the sixth. The coalition is the applicant.

 

The fourth paragraph of the court documents say: “The first to fourth respondents must forthwith provide the applicant with full and frank disclosure of the following to the extent that they are within their possession and control:

 

“Copies of all applications (if any) made by the fifth and sixth respondents for permits, approvals, or leases in respect of the works and properties referred to in paragraphs two and three herein;

 

“And copies of all permits, approvals or leases (if any) that have been granted to the fifth and sixth respondent together with, in each case, copies of all the documents that were before the relevant respondent when it reached the decision to grant such permits, approvals, or leases and the reasons for such decisions and the conditions (if any) upon which is may have been made.”

 

The works and properties referred to in paragraphs two and three, involve various construction works in the Clifton Bay area.

 

The second paragraph says: “Until judgement in the judicial review proceedings or until further order of the court, the fifth respondent, (acting directly or through his employees and agents) be and is hereby enjoined from proceeding with or continuing to undertake” the construction of a groyne on the seabed of Simms Point/Nygard Cay or north of Clifton Bay, as well as the dredging of the sea bed in that same area.

 

The third paragraph says: “Until judgement in the judicial review proceedings or until further order of the court, the sixth respondent (acting directly or through his employees or agents) be and is hereby enjoined from proceeding with or continuing to undertake the demolition of the old dock, the construction of a new dock on the sea bed and beach and the placement of large boulders on the western edge of the concrete ramp all at Jaws Beach, south east of Clifton Bay.”

 

Court documents also note a penal notice to the first, second, third, and fourth respondents if they neglect to obey the court’s order for full disclosure.

 

“If you, the within named first, second, third, or fourth respondents, neglect to obey paragraph four of this order, you may be held to be in contempt of court and liable to imprisonment at Her Majesty’s Prison, or a fine or the sequestration of your assets,” court documents say.

 

A penal notice is also listed for Mr Nygard if he neglects to obey the court’s order regarding constructions, north of Clifton Bay.

 

“If you, the within named fifth Respondent, neglect to obey paragraph two of this order, you may be held to be in contempt of Court and liable to imprisonment at Her Majesty’s Prison, or a fine or the sequestration of your assets.”

 

A similar penal notice is listed for Mr Smith.

 

“If you, the within named sixth respondent, neglect to obey paragraph three of this order, you may be held to be in contempt of Court and liable to imprisonment at Her Majesty’s Prison, or a fine or the sequestration of your assets.”

 

June 14, 2013

 

Tribune 242

 

Caribbean Blog International

 

...steps will be taken to commence a judicial review of the decision of Environment Minister Dr Earl Deveaux in his capacity as minister - to allow for the redevelopment of Bell Island in the manner which has been announced by him, his ministry and the Bahamas National Trust (BNT).

Judicial review to be sought over Bell Island decision
tribune242



A JUDICIAL review will be sought over the decision to allow for the redevelopment of Bell Island, according to a local attorney.

In a press release, attorney Keod Smith stated that steps will be taken to start a judicial review of the decision by Environment Minister Earl Deveaux to grant permission to dredge and excavate more than 12 acres of land and sea at the 349-acre island in the Exuma Cays Land and Sea Park.

Plans to dredge three areas to accommodate vessels up to 150 ft long, excavate a marina and redevelop a barge landing, were submitted by Islands of Discovery Ltd after Prince Karim Aga Khan bought the island last year.

The permits will allow developers to excavate 4.32 acres of upland area for the yacht basin, 2.56 acres of marine area for an outer channel, 4.28 acres of marine area for a barge landing and 1.9 acres of marine area for the outer area of the barge landing within 11 months.

Mr Smith said: "I have been authorised to say that steps will be taken to commence judicial review of the decision of Dr Deveaux in his capacity as minister to allow for the redevelopment of Bell Island in the manner which has been announced by him, his ministry and the BNT."

"The impact upon my clients, who are Bahamian citizens, is that the pristine nature of the park and the marine and land habitat of creatures inclusive of those that are endangered and/or under statutory protection will be put in jeopardy.

"This decision therefore will have a grave economic impact upon my clients and followed a process which we assert is both illegal and procedurally unfair."

Mr Smith did not name his clients, stating only that he was approached by concerned citizens who wanted to explore the legal options available to them.

December 01, 2010

tribune242

Bahamas Blog International

Sidney Stubbs, Embattled Holy Cross MP - Bankruptcy Trial Adjourned

Sidney Stubbs was forced to go back to the Supreme Court after the Court of Appeal rejected his appeal in July on the grounds that it had no jurisdiction to hear his bankruptcy appeal

PLP Member of Parliament - Sidney Stubbs’ Bankruptcy Matter Adjourned Again

 

 

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

September 22, 2004

 

 

  

Supreme Court Judge Jeannie Thompson on Wednesday adjourned the Sidney Stubbs bankruptcy matter to November 9, after the Holy Cross MP’s attorneys indicated that they had aborted the line of argument originally planned.

The amendment to their summons resulted in the judge putting off the matter once again.

Mr. Stubbs was forced to go back to the Supreme Court after the Court of Appeal rejected his appeal in July on the grounds that it had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

Attorney Wayne Munroe, who represents Mr. Stubbs’ creditor, Gina Gonzalez, explained that the matter of whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear the case still has to be clarified.

Members of Mr. Stubbs’ legal team had originally given notice that they intended to argue for the reversal of the bankruptcy order under Section 18 of the Bankruptcy Act, which outlines the circumstances under which a reversal of a bankruptcy order may be made.

But on Tuesday, they changed the summons, giving notice that they intend to argue that the court has an inherent jurisdiction to hear the case.  They plan to assert essentially that there is no Act or rule under which this jurisdiction is specified.

As mentioned, because of the change, the parties have been given more time to prepare their arguments.

Mr. Stubbs has actually hired new attorneys, led by Thomas Evans.  The MP still has as part of his legal team - his parliamentary colleague, attorney Keod Smith, but Charles Mackay is no longer representing him.

Mr. Munroe had indicated during a recent appearance before Justice Thompson that an issue had arisen over whether Mr. Smith, who is also the MP for Mount Moriah, is in contempt of court for comments he made to the press in relation to this matter.

But that issue reportedly did not come up when the parties met in chambers Wednesday.

After coming out of the court, Mr. Smith told reporters, “The issue of jurisdiction will be discussed.  It will be argued before the judge on the 9^th and at that point, the judge will determine whether in fact she has jurisdiction to hear an application from Mr. Stubbs who was adjudicated a bankrupt.”

Mr. Stubbs’ attorneys assert that he can under law bring the case back to court.  But Mr. Munroe argues that only the Registrar of the Supreme Court, who has been appointed trustee in bankruptcy, can move the court to reverse the decision against Mr. Stubbs.

As already reported by the Journal, Mr. Stubbs’ legal woes began on November 28, 1996 when a Supreme Court action was filed requiring him to pay a $55,000 debt with interest to Ms. Gonzalez.

As Mr. Stubbs was preparing to head back to court, notice was being given in the House of Assembly Wednesday that the government intends to bring a resolution seeking to extend the time for him to clear up the bankruptcy matter.

But FNM officials have indicated that they would stage a demonstration in front of the House of Assembly against such a plan.

They pointed out that the Constitution only provides an extension if an MP has avenues for an appeal.  They claim Mr. Stubbs has none.

One PLP official told the Bahama Journal that Mr. Stubbs also plans to appeal before the Privy Council if he is unsuccessful in local courts.

At stake is his seat in the House of Assembly.  He has been absent from the House for the past six months, after Justice Thompson declared him a bankrupt on March 30.

Another six-month extension from the House of Assembly, as is being pushed by the government, could mean his seat on the backbench could be vacant for up to a year.

Weary Perry Christie, Prime Minister of The Bahamas - Resolves to Change The Rules of The House of Assembly to do away with Unconscionably Long Debating

Weary Bahamian Members of Parliament (MPs) vowed that such grueling and tedious debates would never happen again... De ja vu

Weary Prime Minister Vows To Change House Rules

By Candia Dames

candiadames@hotmail.com

Nassau, The Bahamas

22/06/2004

On a Saturday morning in June last year, Members of Parliament dragged themselves out of the House of Assembly as the sun rose over the city of Nassau.

They were noticeably weary, many of them red-eyed.  Minutes earlier, others could not even manage to keep their heads from hitting their tables after meeting almost non-stop since the Friday morning before.

It was then that they vowed that such grueling, tedious debates would never happen again.

It did.

The promised new House rules were reportedly drafted in some form, but were never tabled.

As a result, this year was another year of unconscionably long debating.

It was clear that while House members for instance sat through part of the debate that stretched into the wee hours of Friday morning, few of them were alert enough to follow intently what was being said.

As Mount Moriah MP Keod Smith spoke up until the two o’clock hour last Friday morning, some colleagues downstairs prayed aloud that his contribution would come to a quick end.

Many of them, including the prime minister, were noticeably drained after listening to the former prime minister for more than five hours.  Even backbenchers had spoken for two to three hours.

Outside the chamber, many members grumbled, “We cannot allow this to happen again.”

De ja vu?

It was pretty much what they had said last year after another marathon debate.

When Prime Minister Perry Christie presented his budget communication to parliament on May 26, he saw it as a departure from tradition.

“My objective, in seeking greater brevity and conciseness, is to facilitate the widest possible understanding and reception for the main issues in the budget,” Mr. Christie said at the time.

His communication lasted 90 minutes – a real record breaker.  It was termed the shortest communication in a post-Independence Bahamas.

But few members of the House followed his lead.

“It doesn’t happen anywhere else like this,” an exhausted prime minister told the Journal last Friday night.

He admitted that he was wiped out and needed to get some rest.

“We have been promising to put rules in the House where the speeches will be severely curtailed,” Mr. Christie added.  “I tried to set the pace by having a departure from the normal budget communication, by dropping it down to a 90-minute communication and really with the intension to making it shorter, succinct, to the point.

“But members decided that they would want to present every detail of the function and operation of their ministry.  It is not followed sufficiently by the Bahamian public because the attention spans are really not that long.  We don’t get the kind of publicity and public relations from it as members of parliament that we ought to if we had a more contained debate.”

Mr. Christie predicted that long debates are a tradition, which has finally come to an end.

“You would find that we will move with the new rules and speakers will have to conform to a different process of dealing with debates generally and most certainly the budget debate,” he said.

Only time will tell if another year passes without new rules becoming a reality.