Bahamas News

More than a month after Senior Justice Anita Allen ruled that Sir Jack Hayward is not a 75 percent owner of the Grand Bahama Port Authority and related companies as he has claimed, Sir Jack has launched an appeal of her decision.

Justice Allen ruled on August 30 that the family of Edward St. George is a 50 percent owner of the companies as the relationship between Sir Jack and his late business partner, Mr. St. George, had always been a 50-50 one.

Sir Jack is asking for Justice Allen’s decision to be set aside and a new trial ordered. Alternatively, he is asking that the order for costs be set aside and any other relief the Court of Appeal may think fit.

In his notice of appeal, Sir Jack says the judge erred in refusing his application for an adjournment of the matter on July 31.

He also submits that Justice Allen gave insufficient weight to the injustice that would be caused to him by proceeding with “a one-sided trial” without key evidence from him.

Sir Jack says the judge gave insufficient weight as well to the medical evidence indicating that he was medically unfit to attend the trial, to give evidence and to give instructions.

The notice of appeal also says, “The learned judge gave insufficient weight to the fact that discovery had only just taken place and that a reasonable time was required for Sir Jack to be ready for the trial.”

Sir Jack further submits that Justice Allen gave insufficient weight to the fact that the St. Georges would suffer no substantial prejudice that could not be remedied by an order for costs.

He goes on to say that Justice Allen gave insufficient weight to the evidence before her that established that Sir Jack had not had a reasonable opportunity to prepare for trial and was not fit to attend.

“…The learned judge ought to have granted the adjournment and/or granted the application to reopen the trial in the interests of justice, and ought [to] have granted an adjournment for a reasonable time in order to allow [Sir Jack] to prepare his case,” the notice of appeal says.

In her written ruling, Justice Allen noted that Sir Jack alleged that his shareholding was increased by 25 percent by the transfer by former Port Authority chief financial controller Don De La Rue in November 2006 of one share in Fiduciary Management Services (a Cayman Islands company incorporated in 1982 and used by Sir Jack and Mr. St. George as a nominee company.)

But the judge rejected that allegation and accepted that Mr. De La Rue did not have the authority to transfer the share.

In his notice of appeal, Sir Jack says Justice Allen erred in finding that Mr. De La Rue did not have authority to transfer that one share.

“This issue was not before the learned judge at the trial and did not impact on the issue that was before her,” Sir Jack asserts in the court document, adding that the issue was decided without notice to him.

In her ruling, Justice Allen said she is convinced that the plan to take over control of the Grand Bahama Port Authority and Port Group Limited was hatched in someone’s fertile imagination in late 2006.

“Alas, however, there was too much water under the bridge, too long a paper trail and too many persons with intimate knowledge of the relationship for the plan to be successful,” the judge said.

Sir Jack made the surprising claim to 75 percent ownership last October, triggering another round of legal action by the St. George estate.

Justice Allen said in her ruling, “The figures don’t add up. They don’t support a 75-25 shareholding - neither does the paper trail. There is no evidence of any such assertion prior to 2006 and, indeed on one occasion after 2006, [Sir Jack] contradicted that assertion.”

The judge said the preponderance of evidence points to a shareholding of 50-50 between Sir Jack and Mr. St. George.

“Having heard and considered the evidence of the plaintiffs’ witnesses, having observed their demeanor as they gave their evidence, having read and considered the numerous documents adduced by the plaintiffs (the St. George estate) and there being no evidence challenging the credibility of the witnesses or the substance of their evidence and no attempt on behalf of the first defendant (Sir Jack) to challenge the documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiffs, I find that the plaintiffs have proven their case,” she wrote.

Source: Bahama Journal