Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Home National Sports Business Lifestyles Religion Arts & Culture Pulse Spice Editorial letters Opinion Foodie Sportscope Real Talks Weekend Report PDF's Classifieds Contact About Us Archive Weather

Letters | Opinion | Editorial | Weekend Report
Baha Mar to appeal New York ruling By Scott Armstrong ~ Guardian Business Editor ~ scott@nasguard.com: The long-running legal row over the collapsed $2.6 billion joint venture between Baha Mar and Harrah's Entertainment is not over despite a New York judge ruling against the Bahamian company. In the New York State Supreme Court, Judge Charles Ramos sided entirely with Harrah's, and its Caesars Bahamas Investment Corporation, supporting its right to pull out of the mega-deal and rejecting Baha Mar's contention of breach of the investors agreement, breech of fiduciary duty, promissory estoppel, equitable estoppel, negligent misrepresentation, breach of guarantee against Harrah's and fraud. But in a public statement reacting to the ruling Baha Mar executives it would appeal the judge's ruling. Baha Mar said: "We are disappointed with the ruling by Judge Ramos of the New York Supreme Court. However, neither this ruling nor Harrah's conduct will impair the Baha Mar project from moving forward. "We are currently in the last stages of finalizing our financing and thereafter obtaining Government approvals, which will allow us to quickly commence construction and bring this project to life for the great benefit of The Bahamas and the future of its economy. "At the same time, we will appeal the ruling, which we believe was wrongly decided and continue to seek redress on our claims for Harrah's breach of commitments to Baha Mar and the People and Government of The Bahamas." The ruling is unlikely to impact on Baha Mar's negotiations with its new partners - the China Export-Import Bank and China State Construction Judge Ramos said that Caesars, owned by Harrah's, had acted entirely correctly under Article 10 of its joint venture agreement with Baha Mar, which gave both parties the right to back out if conditions had not been met by a set closing date. That closing date was December 31, 2007, and though Baha Mar twice asked for an extension, Caesars declined as it became increasingly concerned about financing. Judge Ramos awarded "reasonable attorneys' fees, expert fees and litigation costs" to Caesars and ordered that Baha Mar's case asking for a ruling in its favor be "denied in its entirety." Wednesday January 3, 2010