business@tribunemedia.net
Wednesday, March 4, 2026
$5.30 $4.92
$5.31
$5.30
$5.31
Gov’ts $357m GBPA owner change bid suffers setback BY NEIL HARTNELL Tribune Business Editor nhartnell@tribunemedia.net THE Davis administration’s ambition of forcing a rapid ownership change at the Grand Bahama Port Authority (GBPA) suffered a setback - but has not been ended - by the ruling that dismissed its $357m payment demand. The long-awaited decision in the Government’s two-year arbitration claim against Freeport’s quasi-governmental authority, which was released in full yesterday, rejected its reimbursement bid on the basis it was brought under a Hawksbill Creek Agreement clause that had been superseded, and replaced, by a section in the 1994 agreement that the
then-Ingraham administration struck with the GBPA. That section, described as paragraph three, required the GBPA to pay the Government $500,000 every year “for the purpose of defraying the administrative expenses incurred by the Government in the Port area” for a period of five years between 1996 and 2000. But, while the two sides’ commitments obligated them to jointly “review” this obligation and the sum to be paid in future years, no agreement was reached and payment lapsed. But, while its $357m demand for reimbursement of expenses incurred over and above tax revenues generated by Freeport between 2018 and 2022 was rejected, the
Wrong Hawksbill clause derails payment demand But Gov’t given alternative path to reimbursement Both sides claim win, but neither fully successful
RYAN PINDER KC
three-strong arbitration panel - featuring a former Cayman Islands chief justice and two UK law lords - nevertheless set out an alternative path by which the Government can secure outstanding payments determined to be due and owing by the GBPA.
GBPA’s $1bn damages claim rejection ‘good news for taxpayers’ BY NEIL HARTNELL Tribune Business Editor nhartnell@tribunemedia.net THE Attorney General yesterday hailed the rejection of the Grand Bahama Port Authority’s (GBPA) $1bn damages claim against the Government while accusing it of trying to enrich itself at the expense of Bahamian taxpayers. Ryan Pinder KC, speaking after arbitrators rejected seven of the eight counter-claims launched against the Government by Freeport’s quasi-governmental authority, asserted that the move “would have had significant fiscal implications for the country” had it succeeded and asserted that the verdict represents “good news for all Bahamian taxpayers”. The Government’s top legal adviser, who was joined by Ginger Moxey and Dr Michael Darville, current and former Grand Bahama ministers, told a media briefing at the Prime Minister’s Office that the arbitrators’ decision will also benefit taxpayers moving forward because
AG alleges tried to enrich itself at taxpayer expense Freeport residents question if anything will change Freeport residents question if anything will change it affirmed that the GBPA owes an annual “liability” to pay money to the Public Treasury for the Hawksbill Creek Agreement’s remaining 28-year term (see other article on Page 1B). This is stipulated by the “review mechanism” contained in the 1994 deal between the GBPA and then-Ingraham administration, which Mr Pinder yesterday said “remains operational, and its provisions enforceable, notwithstanding it has not been enforced for many years”. The arbitrators, in their ruling, found: “The tribunal considers that it is self-evident that the Government can invoke the
review for future years because it is inherent in the GBPA’s argument, and in the tribunal’s conclusion, that paragraph three has replaced clause 1(5) (d). That paragraph three, and therefore the review, remains fully enforceable. In any event, there is no basis for contending that the review is inoperable simply because it has been allowed to lie dormant by the Government.” While any sums due and owing by the GBPA to the Government now have to be determined by the two parties via negotiation or, if talks fail, arbitration, Mr PInder asserted that - in rejecting the quasi-governmental authority’s counter-claim
- the three-strong arbitration panel of Sir Anthony Smellie KC, its chairman, and Lord Neuberger and Dame Elizabeth Gloster, had also ruled that the GBPA does not have “the exclusive right” to govern the 230 square mile Port area and that its claims of government interference are misconceived. “The Government has a right to legislate, regulate and participate in governance,” the Attorney General said. “This is an historic event with the interpretation of Freeport, the Hawksbill Creek Agreement, and the relationship between the GBPA and the Government dating back more than 70 years. This is an historic result. In any event, we are glad that there is a definitive basis for the inter-relationship between the Government and GBPA as far as the management and governance of Freeport.” Mr Pinder based his assessment of “an historic” outcome - one repeated by his Cabinet and ministerial
COUNTER - See Page B2
chief justice of the by statute law passed by AG: GBPA arbitration verdict former Cayman Islands, and Lord the Bahamas’ Parliament. and Dame Eliz“We are of the view solves Port utilities regulation Neuberger abeth Gloster, two UK law that the Government’s BY NEIL HARTNELL Tribune Business Editor nhartnell@tribunemedia.net THE Attorney General yesterday asserted that findings in the $357m Grand Bahama Port Authority (GBPA) arbitration dispute could result in the “dismissal” of Supreme Court challenges to the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority’s (URCA ) authority to supervise utilities in Freeport.
Ryan Pinder KC suggested that Grand Bahama Power Company’s battle over URCA’s ability to regulate it, and whether the Electricity Act 2024 supersedes and overrides the Hawksbill Creek Agreement, has effectively been decided after the threestrong GBPA arbitration panel found “the Government’s right to legislate” is superior to Freeport’s founding treaty. The tribunal, chaired by Sir Anthony Smellie KC,
lords, rejected the GBPA’s bid for “a declaration that it was the sole regulator of the construction and operation of electricity and other utilities in the Port area”. “However, the Tribunal held that the Government has a right to introduce legislation to apply to the construction, operation and regulation of utilities in the Port area,” Mr Pinder added. In particular, the arbitrators noted that the Hawksbill Creek Agreement provides for its provisions to be overridden
right to legislate overrides the GBPA’s rights under clause 2(21), and therefore the enactment and implementation within the Port Area of the Electricity Act 2015 and the Electricity Act 2024 did not amount to a breach of the Hawksbill Creek Agreement by the Government,” the arbitrators ruled. Mr Pinder yesterday hailed the decision as effectively settling the ongoing Supreme Court battle over whether URCA has
POWER - See Page B7
GB Chamber chief says arbitration changes little BY NEIL HARTNELL Tribune Business Editor nhartnell@tribunemedia.net THE Grand Bahama Chamber of Commerce’s president yesterday said the ruling over the Grand Bahama Port Authority’s (GBPA) $357m arbitration dispute changes little in Freeport and highlights the urgent need to “revisit and modernise” the city’s
governance and regulatory framework. Dillon Knowles, in a statement, said the outcome meant “both parties were unsuccessful in their respective claims” with the Government unable to enforce its $357m reimbursement demand against Freeport’s quasi-governmental authority which itself saw seven of its eight counter-claims against
the Davis administration rejected. “Under the revised provision, GBPA is required to pay the Government an annual stipend of $500,000 for the provision of public services. The parties were directed to review and continue to give effect to that clause,” he said. “The tribunal further noted that GBPA had acquiesced to the Government’s earlier breaches and emphasised
that, as a sovereign authority, the Government retains the power to amend legislation. “The overall impact on Freeport is that the parties effectively return to the status quo ante. GBPA remains obligated to pay only the annual stipend, and the Government continues to exercise final regulatory authority over
REACTION - See Page B7
GRAND BAHAMA PORT AUTHORITY (GBPA) HEADQUARTERS Besides finding that paragraph four’s “review mechanism” remains operational and enforceable, and has not been eroded by inactivity, the arbitrators’ decision also left the door open to the Government seeking retroactive reimbursement from the GBPA going back more than two decades’ to at least 2001-2002. This, in effect, could pave the way for the Government to renew its demand that Freeport’s quasi-governmental
authority pay it a nine-figure, multi-million dollar sum. The immediate impact from the 139-page “partial decision” rendered by Sir Anthony Smellie KC, the arbitration panel’s chairman, and Lord Neuberger and Dame Elizabeth Gloster, is to send both parties back to the negotiating table to first develop the “review mechanism” - including its governance framework and
DECISION - See Page B2
GBPA claim Gov’t ‘frustrated’ $10bn investment dismissed BY NEIL HARTNELL Tribune Business Editor nhartnell@tribunemedia.net THE Grand Bahama Port Authority’s (GBPA) assertion that the Government’s “misguided policies” resulted in it “deliberately frustrating” more than $10bn worth of investment for Freeport has been rejected by arbitrators. The three-strong panel, headed by a former Cayman Islands chief justice and two UK law lords, found there were “understandable concerns” over the financing sources for the joint investment by Weller Development and Pegasus in the Six Senses hotel project amid accusations by the GBPA that the Government deliberately stalled providing the necessary approvals in a bid to force its owners, the Hayward and St George families, to sell their interests. The panel’s decision revealed that, while the Government was opposed to the Weller/Pegasus group buying an ownership interest in the GBPA while the two families remained in control of Freeport’s quasi-governmental authority and its Port Group Ltd affiliate, it did not act “inappropriately” in relation to this project and the allegation that it
“diverted, discouraged and/ or frustrated investment” from Freeport cannot be sustained. “The principal project relied on in this connection was Weller/Pegasus, an ambitious project which was characterised by the promoters as promising upwards of $10bn of investments into the Port area, “ the arbitrators found in a ruling that was released yesterday. “The GBPA accuses the Government of deliberate frustration of this project in order to force the GBPA shareholders to divest of their interests in GBPA and its parent, IDC, to government itself or else to others, most proximately the Weller/Pegasus conglomerate.” IDC is Intercontinental Diversified Corporation (IDC), the ultimate Cayman-based parent for the GBPA, Port Group Ltd and all of Freeport’s major economic and infrastructure assets. “The contemporaneous evidence does reveal that the Government was against Weller/Pegasus buying into IDC while the existing shareholders, the St George and Hayward families, remained in control. This opposition was largely based on misgivings
DEAL - See Page B4