In a press release issued yesterday, Fred Smith, attorney for the Save Guana Cay Reef Association, said the Association filed a petition on Tuesday for special leave to appeal to the Privy Council against the May 8 decision of the Court of Appeal releasing the developers of their November 2005 undertaking to stop work on the Guana Cay project in the Abacos.
In the application for special leave to appeal, the Association asked for a stay of the Court of Appeal’s decision and for the reinstatement of the undertaking by the developers to stop work until a Supreme Court judge rules on the substantive case.
Last month, the developers of the Baker’s Bay project scored a victory when the Court of Appeal dismissed an application filed by the Save Guana Cay Reef Association seeking leave to appeal to the Privy Council against the recent ruling of the lower court.
The Association had been trying to get a court order to stop the multimillion-dollar development, which has been at the centre of controversy for more than a year now.
Last November, Discovery Land Company agreed to stop work on the project until the Supreme Court rules on the substanive case.
But the Court of Appeal said in a ruling on May 8 that as of May 31, the developers were cleared of that undertaking and could get back to work, which they did.
It was that ruling that the Association appealed to the high court in London. The substantive case in the Supreme Court wrapped up on February 23, but (allegedly corrupt) Acting Justice Norris Carroll has yet to deliver a judgment.
The Save Guana Cay Reef Association wants the judge to rule that the government had no legal authority to approve such a project, which Association members insist is already damaging the environment.
Weeks ago, Mr. Smith had asked the Court of Appeal for an order saying that until the judgment is delivered by Acting Justice Carroll in the Supreme Court the developers be prohibited from continuing their project, which would have included the blocking of any further clearing of land, or extension of roads.
But the high court dismissed that request in May, saying it was “misconceived”.
In his press release yesterday, Mr. Smith said, “…the Solicitor for the Association, Mr. Theo Solley of Muirhead and Co. and counsel Ms. Ruth Jordon were able to obtain an urgent hearing before the Privy Council today.”
He claimed, “The Privy Council issued an injunction in the terms of the letter of November 22, 2005 from Graham Thompson & Co. until the judgment of the Supreme Court or the petition for special leave whichever is the earlier, with liberty to the developers to apply to discharge the order by 48 hours notice.”
Commenting on the latest legal maneuver, Mr. Smith said, “This appeal before the Privy Council comes in a long line of continuing applications being mounted by the people of Guana Cay through their Association to protect and preserve their rights and the environment.”
He added, “The people of Guana Cay remain serious, committed and determined to fight for their rights and they anxiously await the decision of Justice Carroll on the merits of the judicial review application.”
In response to Mr. Smith’s press release, the developers released a statement of their own, noting that they had not seen the Privy Council ruling.
“Attorneys for the developers of Baker’s Bay have been told by email from Mr. Smith that the Privy Council has issued an injunction against the developers. The developers nor their attorneys have seen this order. Any such order was made without hearing submissions by the developers or the government,” their statement said.
“The developers’ attorneys have been told that the order provides for the developers to apply to have the injunction discharged upon 48 hours notice. The developers have instructed their attorneys to immediately apply to have the injunction set side.”
The developers said they view this latest tactic by the Association “as a stalling tactic”.
“Importantly, we believe that this latest legal maneuver by Mr. Smith and SGCR will be quickly addressed and hopefully disposed of once our case and the government’s case is presented to the Privy Council,” the statement said.
