The Everton Cumberbatch Versus Leroy Parris, Larry Tatem And Breakers Investment Inc Matter – Part II

Sir Richard Cheltenham (l) Leroy Parris (c) Larry Tatem (r)

A response to BU’s earlier blog – The Everton Cumberbatch Versus Leroy Parris, Larry Tatem And Breakers Investment Inc Matterwas a cry to have sight of the documents for the defendants. We  are pleased to post additional documents which shine light on the other side of this matter. We highly recommend that the BU family read these documents which give insight into how the prominent and ‘deep pockets’ in our society operate. The affidavit of Leroy Parris is of particular interest and instructive in this regard.

This matter is before the courts and, BU understands will be decided shortly. Therefore BU will tread lightly by sounding off within the bounds of fair comment.

A careful read of the Affidavit of Leroy Parris suggests that he was not a part of the plan and he was merely acting as the “deep pocket” in return for shares. BU surmises that it is highly unusual that, based upon Cumberbatch’s affidavit evidence – see earlier blog, he did all the work, identified the property and then was to receive 10% of the share capital of the company, while Messrs Tatem, Cheltenham and Parris divided the remaining 90% of the share capital amongst them and Tatem was allowed to stack the board of directors in his favour by inviting his son to sit as director.

This case is most important to Bajans because it gives currency to the perception by those who wish to better their lot that there are two Barbados’. It appears to show an attempt by those with deep pockets to hijack good ideas and opportunities when they are brought to them for financing. Although to be fair this lifting of ideas happens all over the world. There is, therefore, a strong argument for budding entrepreneurs like Cumberbatch to require the Tatems and Cheltenhams execute non disclosure agreements (NDA) when ideas are bought to them. NDAs are a fact of doing business nowadays.

There is another problem that Barbados – both government and judiciary – have got to address as a matter of urgency. The unjustifiable wait times for these matters to be brought before the courts, heard and decided. It seems Everton Cumberbatch is lucky in that his matter has taken a relatively short time – so far! BU is aware of several cases involving millions of dollars languishing in the Court system, in some cases exceeding more than five years. The common thread in many of these cases is that prominent citizens, deep pockets, whether parties to the cases or not, are somehow involved and a resolution of these cases would in some way disadvantage them.

We continue to lament why Barbados foreign investments are shrinking, part of the reason is the abominable and unjust wait times experienced in our Court system! Who wants to put money into a country where if they have the misfortune to have to litigate it will require too much time and money.

There is the suspicion that the reason Cumberbatch has managed to have his case heard in a relatively – for the Barbados courts – timely manner lies in the fact that it involves the much publicised and under threat Leroy Parris, and that the public perception of corruption if this case was unduly – for Barbados – delayed, there would be a raucous outcry. Although our judiciary is said to be independent the political considerations in matters which involve Leroy Parris cannot be ignored.

BU has raised our alert level to Hawk Mode regarding this case.  We will be watching and reporting on whether the courts reserve their judgement for an inordinate and unjust length of time. If that happens, we will also be naming and shaming the judge concerned and issuing a call for their removal from the Bench to Chief Justice Gibson.

16 thoughts on “The Everton Cumberbatch Versus Leroy Parris, Larry Tatem And Breakers Investment Inc Matter – Part II

    • @observing

      Know you are a person who likes to observe.

      Is it not passing strange that many of the lawyers who frequent BU have given a pass to commenting on this issue?

      Is it not passing strange that many of the politicos have also given wide birth? why?

      Here is an excellent example of what is wrong with Barbados.

      We have Parris, Chelltenham, a big B and Tatem a big B who have all set their political allegiances aside to form a partnership.

      Can anyone believe that similar partnerships are not formed elsewhere in society?

      What about CLICO? What about CGI? What about the fraternities? What about the Bar Association.What about the media?

      This is why the traditional media would feel no obligation to let people know that there is a catfight to own 30 acres of Paragon earmarked for development possibly.

  1. There are still more questions: There is an exhibit attached to Parris’ Affidavit – the letter from Dr. Sir Richard Cheltenham QC PC on his professional letter-head stating that he is acting on the behalf of the players in this company, presumably including Everton Cumberbatch, where he confirms the share holding arrangements at a previous meeting with Parris and Tatem.

    Mr. Cumberbatch asserts in his Affidavit that Sir Richard signed for half of the loan from Clico which was uathorised by Parris.

    So at one time Sir Richard is a guarantor for part of the loan from Clico and at another time he is acting in a professional capacity. What agreement did he have with Mr. Cumberbatch when the business opportunity was first presented to him? As pioneer of the project, did Mr. Cumberbatch have any agreement with Tatem or Sir Richard prior to the incorporation and the conveyance? How did the business opportunity pass from Mr. Cumberbatch to Mr Tatem and Sir Richard?

    It does seem that the next logical step in the legal proceedings is for Sir Richard Cheltenham QC, PC to be summoned by the Court to give a full acccount for this sordid affair. It smells stink! Who did he take instruction from in this matter as the learned attorney? What agreement he had/has with Mr. Cumberbatch for his involvement as an investor if he can be deemed as such?

    It does seem that in addition to being joined as a defendant in the case Mr. Cumberbatch has every right to formally complain to the disciplinary committee of the Bar Association for the manner in which Sir Richard conducted himself in this affair. In the theories of criminal law this would be deemed a theft, but as a Tort is is called conversion, and under the companys Act it is blatant oppression.

    Understanding Barbados, no one should expect any media exposure of this case as there is no credit in it for the outstanding QC, Sir Richard, the prominent businessman, Mr. Tatem or the figure behind the current Clico crisis Mr. Parris, all three now being over the age of 70. This is Barbados people, but better can be expected from the courts.

  2. So the deal is that Parris authorised a loan of Clico’s money on the condition that he gets piece of the action, and to top up what he gets he agrees to put in US$500,000 of his own money, either before or after the loan.

    There is the mention of another US$500,000 injection by one Dr. Patrick Antoine in Mr. Cumberbatch’s Affidavit. If this is the Dr. Antoine (a Grenadian Economist) who worked with the Regional Negotiantion Machienery there is evn more to investigate as he is known to be have been represented by Sir Richard in a matter of professional misconduct around the same time of this deal.

  3. Another group of power brokers at work using the same well worn principles of bullying.

    Links, although denied, all the way to the top.

    It might appear that the utterances of Sir Roy are unrelated but I would posit that Sir Roy’s utterances are learnt from the period when race was routinely used to bully by our leaders and to facilitate their particular set of power brokers.

    Sir Roy is old school and programmed in a way that even he doesn’t realise he is programmed.

    With Mr. Cumberbatch we watch alleged power over change of use at work to effect the bullying.

    Race won’t work. I suspect the cast of charaters are of similar origins.

    The result in the past was the power brokers got what they wanted and the few dollars that satisfied them and their masters changed hands.

    Over time they became greedy and what will satisfy them now makes the economic activity uneconomic. They also developed other means of bullying besides race.

    In their greed, they ended up eating the goose that laid the golden egg …. so no more golden eggs …. or fatted calves …. or at least very few.

  4. @David. If the complaint against Cheltenham is made and the Bar Association decision is unsatisfactory, it can be appealed to the Court of Appeal. The problem with all this is that the whole process against an eminent attorney, especially one with a knighthood, is going to be difficult, expensive and drawn out. And nothing will happen, even if there is a no-brainer of a case. You can expect them to circle the wagons and delay, delay, delay. And unless someone actually posts here on BU the complaint to the BBA, there will be no news coverage at all.

    I agree, partly only and in theory ONLY, with For Justice and have nothing further to say at this time, except to add that we are still dealing with unproven allegations. I also have a problem with allegations of criminal acts that are also torts – the burden of proof is usually very high and, if not met, can be considered defamatory. Also, we have not had the advantage of seeing and hearing all sides. My sympathies are undoubtedly with Mr Cumberbatch, but the lack of evidence from both sides produced so far makes me refuse to abandon my firm perch on the fence.

    Very interesting blog. Very interesting indeed. I have noted it for the future.

  5. the amazing thing about this whole issue is that u bajans really believe that leroy parris will spend time in prison or that he will have to hand over his cash…lord have mercy…hahaha. just like u are anxious to see if that guy Ian whatever who stole the 10 million dollars from Sagicor will spend a day in jail. the police can’t find the money. the report was that he stole just over 500,000 i think, but lord have mercy, to think it was really 10 mil….gosh and not a day in jail he will spend. just like Parris, how much did he embezzled? have u people forgotten this is Barbados? it is not important who u know but rather, who knows u and i guarantee u that all this attempt at justice is just to pacify onlookers. the saying ‘the more u look, the less u see’ certainly applies here. i refused to read any of the court proceedings as i know the man will still be walking the streets of barbados or where ever he chooses too with the money innocent people handed over to Clico. in times such as these, we will trust that the lord will deal with them. in the case of the 10 mil stolen, at least the guy used to help all and sundry, so he is a modern day robin hood.. he stole from the rich who are robbing the poor, and gave to the poor who are being robbed by the rich…i guess it balances out then ;-).

  6. This issue is not only a national disgrace because prominent men including a knighted Queens Counsel have sought to take advantage of one of less status, but because the established media have bluntly refused to report on the case. Only because of the fearless reporting of BU this matter is now know beyond a certain circle. Shame on the Advocate, Nation and award winning local journalist who have shown no interest in such worthy news.

    The defendants and Sir Richard should come out of “hiding” with their side of the story. A case was brought against them and except for Parris’ response there is no other defence. There was a motion to strike but that was defeated and the judgement itself dealt a telling blow to them.

    Why didn’t they appeal the judgements that have gone against them?

    Why haven’t Tatem defended himself and Cheltenham since 2008 when the case was filed?

    Have they put in a defence against the suit of Parris # 341 to get back his money?

    Now Sir. Richard is to be joined as the 4th Defendant can they object to this with the learned counsel having played such a central role in the whole scheme?

    All fair minded Barbadians should rally with Mr. Cumberbatch that here after not another humble citizen should suffer such unfairness, and this Freundel Stuart government should ensure that Mr. Cumberbatch gets development approval and support his endeavour to realise the project.

    Well done David, keep the Hawk eye of BU on this one to the end.

  7. Grassroots;

    Reading between the lines, it appears that getting development approval for the project is contingent on Breakers securing documented approval and agreement for the Military site to be moved from the outskirts of Fairy valley elsewhere at the expense of Breakers. Has this been done so far? and if so, when? Is Freundel likely to give such approval at this time if it has not yet been given? Has Mr. Cumberbatch sourced enough money to pay out the original participants in the deal? If so are his sources likely to follow through with the deal possibly still up in the air and in the public domain, to boot?
    How do you propose that fair minded bajans should rally round Mr. Cumberbatch?

  8. Probe makes mention of Dr. Patrick Antoine. Why wasn’t he named as a defendant? After all the Regional Negotiating Machienery would be interesting to know of his involvement.

  9. Speak of the Nation and Advocate not publishing details of this case and compare that with the Trinidad Express and the Kaiteur News of Guyana both publications being fearless and brutal in their reporting of under the table manoeuvres of the well connected , corrupt politicians and those corrupt public officers particularly in Guyana.99% of the names of the exposed are indian.Guyana is the most horrendous example of barefaced thievery in the caricom region and there is nary a word from that defender of the indo guyanese and the indo trinidadian caricom political cabals now singing for his supper in trinidad.Was he not sent packing by a former bajan PM?Was there not,later, some facilitation in the justice system of Barbados in dispatching two fellows,related, with fairly heavy slaps on the wrists for offences for which an afro baje will serve nuff time behind bars? Justice you say?”Thou art fled….”

  10. Checkit-out,

    The public should call on the Attorney General and the Government to strip Sir Richard Cheltenham of his QC ranking in the profession, the Governor General should remove him from the local Privy Council and revoke his knighthood.

    A similar call that Tatem should also have his national honor (GCM) revoked and both Prime Minister and Opposition leader should publicly denounce the unfair treatment of Mr. Cumberbatch by these big-shots.

    The CJ as principal of the legal profession should act in some way to restrict lawyers while proporting to be rendering professional service from any benefit beyond professional fees in the same matter.

    Too much of this sort of thing has gone on in Barbados for too long without condemnation.

  11. OK Grassroots; I get your drift now. That is if you are saying that when the matter is adjucated and it is found that Mr. Cumberbatch’s affidavit is materially correct and the defendants get only a small slap on the wrist, that the public should then chip in and protest. I’m with you.

    HOWEVER, I would still like to know exactly how a protest movement would get the PM and the LOO to denounce the defendants in this case. Perhaps the small opposition parties could muster a few people and BU might be able to muster a few but how do you get a significant number of normally docile and self centered bajans to work together for an objective that seeks to right a wrong to a businessman that many might think could find the resources to fight his own battles.

    If you are saying that the public should protest now at a time when there has not yet been an adjudication of the matter. I’ll just join amused on the fence.

    Re. the matter of the CJ acting to restrict lawyers from receiving benefits other than professional fees for matters they are acting in professionally. I totally agree with the ends but I think the means probably need a bit of work still.

  12. Checkit-out,
    That such a matter can be before the court with Cheltenham as attorney in the first place, should cause Sir Richard Cheltenham to be stripped of his QC ranking in the profession, the Governor General should remove him from the local Privy Council and revoke his knighthood also. His is a good example of bad statesmanship. Nothing noble at all about his conduct! And Tatem too should also have his national honor (GCM) revoked. What have they done in the first place to earn such national honor?

    A reread of the Affidavit filed by Mr. Cumberbatch shows what really goes on in Barbados by people who should know better. Working class people owe this courageous young man much for his stance against injustice.

  13. Pingback: 13 Years Later – Everton Cumberbatch Vs Larry Tatem, Leroy Parris and Johnny Cheltenham | Barbados Underground

The blogmaster dares you to join the discussion.