Court rules against developer in land swap dispute
PHILIPSBURG -- Tesi NV is a project developer and a part of the Port de Plaisance Group. In a notarial deed dated June 8, 1998, it obtained the right of long lease to several parcels of land located in Simpson Bay from a company called Ultra Classic.
The deed states that Tesi ceded the properties to the (then) island territory of St. Maarten. A company called Jenstan Oceanic ceded the right of long lease to another piece of land. Jenstan has since disappeared; the National Gazette of December 21, 2018, reports a warrant from the tax inspectorate against this company.
On four different occasions (in 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2015) Port de Plaisance requested a parcel of land on Kim Sha Beach for the construction of a five-star hotel and a casino. The department of VROMI gave a negative advice about this request.
Claret Connor was at the time Minister of Public Housing, Urban Planning, Environment and Infrastructure, aka VROMI). On November 18, 2015, he granted Tesi the right of long lease to the land on Kim Sha Beach, located next to the Billy Folly Road. In exchange, Tesi, or the Port de Plaisance Group, would give the government a piece of land near the causeway bridge for the construction of a waste water treatment plant.
Connor’s decision was controversial, because the parliament had earlier voted in favor of a motion of no confidence against the government lead by Prime Minister Marcel Gumbs. The Parliament had declared the proposed land swap controversial and was against it. When Connor’s successor Angel Meyers took office he declared the decision to grant Tesi the right of long lease null-and-void on December 16, 2015.
Tesi went to court and demanded that the government cooperate with the issuance of the right of long lease. Earlier the court ruled that a land swap requires a national ordinance if the value of the land is more than 3,000 guilders. It concluded that Connor was not authorized to close the deal with Tesi.
The developer went to court again, but on November 18 of last year, the Common Court of Justice ruled against Tesi and sentenced the company to pay the costs of the procedure, an amount of just over 21,000 guilders ($11,732).
###
ADVERTISEMENT
LOGIN TO READ MORE... THIS IS A PREMIUM ARTICLE. YOU NEED AT LEAST YEARLY SUBSCRIPTION TO ACCESS THIS ARTICLE.
...
Some articles or portions of articles are restricted exclusively for our registered members and paying subscribers. Please login here to read the rest of this article. If you do not already have a paid subscription, you will need to register here and pay for a subscription first in order to gain access to our website to read articles or contents that are restricted to paid subscribers. You need to buy at least a Day subscription for 75ct to gain access. Or log in first if you are already a registered paying subscriber to this website. Click here to register and support our work with a paid subscription.
