Tales from the Courts – The Ongoing Saga of Donald Best, Peter Allard and Marjorie Knox’s Claim to 1% of Barbados XXIX

Peter Allard

Peter Allard

The BU family will know this is a story concerning over 1% of the total landmass of Barbados located on the South Coast through which the ABC Highway runs. A large portion of the ABC Highway was purchased from Kingsland Estates Limited the company that owns this land.

Those who are unfamiliar with the Kingsland Estate Saga  are welcomed to use the BU Search Box by entering the words ‘Kingsland Estates’.  Given the claim over a vast swath of land on a 166 square mile landmass, BU is befuddled why traditional media – with the exception of a few reports by Pat Hoyos –  have imposed an almost total blackout on the story. BU is forced to ask Pat Hoyos how did he come to report on the Kingsland matter anyway. Was he on holiday in London, or did the Nation newspaper pay him to observe and report the case.

Although BU published court filed evidence to support reports the Barbados press decided to ignore a story central to which includes a large tract of our landmass.

Mr Donald Best whose place of residence is a post office box (drop box), and, who was convicted and jailed for contempt of court in Ontario, was released having served his sentence, having appealed his conviction and lost.

After his incarceration he revisited the case he had lost while fronting for Peter Allard cum Marjorie Knox and sued a long list of people in Ontario, including several Bajans he had previously sued – and lost and he has now appealed, again.

Spearheaded by the Barbados defendants, referred to by the Ontario courts as the “Caribbean defendants”, 21 of the 39 defendants applied to the Ontario Court of Appeal for security for costs. Security for costs is defined by Wikipedia as follows (with our emphases):

Security for costs is a common law legal concept of application only in costs jurisdictions, and is an order sought from a court in litigation. The general rule in costs jurisdiction is that “costs follow the event”. In other words, the loser in legal proceedings must pay the legal costs of the successful party. Where a defendant has a reasonable apprehension that its legal costs will not be paid for by the plaintiff if the defendant is successful, the defendant can apply to the court for an order that the plaintiff provide security for costs. Furthermore, the amount that is ordered by the Judge is in direct correlation to the strength or weakness of the plaintiff’s case brought herewith. The weaker the probability of the plaintiff prevailing, the higher the security order.

Typically a claimant will be outside the jurisdiction of the court: the law of security for costs recognises that orders of the court relating to payment of a party’s legal costs can be very difficult to enforce in non-common law jurisdictions, and so will order security to be provided. Security can also be ordered where a plaintiff is insolvent, or prone to vexatious litigation.

Security is usually provided in the form of a bank cheque paid into the court, or held in a trust account operated jointly by both the plaintiff’s and defendant’s lawyers.

If the defendant is successful, the money can be applied against the costs order. If the claimant is successful, the security is returned to the claimant.

It appears that Mr Best still owes a few of the “Caribbean defendants” $400,000 Canadian from his first litigation reported by BU commencing in 2007. Mr Best has still not paid his court-ordered costs (neither has his counsel, Mr Lipinsky who was adjudged by the Ontario courts to be jointly and severally liable for the costs) of Mr Best’s latest foray in the Ontario courts on matters within the sovereign jurisdiction of Barbados.

Despite the foregoing, Mr Best has now attempted to appeal, again. And he has come up against Ontario Justice of Appeal Hoy who has granted the defendants the mouth-watering sum of over CDA$600,000 (about BBD$1.2 million) which, if not paid into court within 30 days Mr Best’s appeal stands dismissed. Here is the endorsement of Hoy ACJO.

The problem with all this is that you cannot get blood out of a stone and Mr Best does not have sufficient assets in Canada that can be attached to pay these costs. So, although Mr Best cum Mr Peter Allard paid Best’s previous attorney Mr McKenzie almost CDA$4 million and must have paid Mr Lipinsky a fair sum too, certain of the Caribbean defendants may well find themselves out of pocket to the tune of almost CDA$.75 million (BBD$1.5 million). But to paraphrase Mr Richard Cox, “What is $1.5 million between friends?”

Mr Allard owns Graeme Hall swamp and has sued the Government of Barbados under its BIT with Canada. BU has produced court filed documents proving Mr Allard’s involvement. Mr Allard was the paymaster of Mr Best and his wife and company and some of his children; Mr Allard was the paymaster of Mr McKenzie and his wife; Mr Allard paid for blogs for hire (possibly reporters for hire Pat?) and the setting up of blogs to advance his agendas; Mr Allard paid Alair Shepherd QC and Tariq Khan here in Barbados to represent Marjorie Knox and himself. All of this cost millions of dollars.

Maybe Barbados as a nation has no right to complain about non-payment of costs and damages, since it appears that it practices the same thing – it has been widely reported by the local media that Barbados has still not paid its obligations in respect of Shanique Myrie matter. So maybe Barbados deserves Best – and Best deserves Barbados. And maybe both deserve the CCJ which decided in effect that security for costs awarded against Marjorie Knox in Barbados in the amount of BBD$1 million and then fortified by the Privy Council by a further BBD$300,000 all the while Knox’s sole assets were subject to successful litigation culminating in a charging order.

Tales from the Courts – “THE OTHER SIDE OF THE KINGSLAND ESTATES MATTER” and “THE SECRETIVE WORLD OF PETER ANDREW ALLARD” XXVII (Update)

Marjorie Knox

Marjorie Knox

Initially, BU took the view that the Kingsland Estates court matter was not one of national importance, despite the fact that it encompassed over 1% of the total landmass of Barbados. It was, in BU’s judgement, a private, family squabble.

[…]
Continue reading

The Other Side of the Kingsland Estates Matter REVISITED

BU has received a request for an update to this matter, three years after the case of Nelson Barbados Group Limited v. Barbados and others concluded before the Ontario courts.

From time to time, because this was such a big series for BU and because the final denouement was so shocking, BU has kept tabs on what is going on. So, in response to the request here is what we know that has transpired subsequent to the last report of BU in 2010 on this matter.

PETER ANDREW ALLARD

In or about December 2011, Mr Allard was appointed a Queens Counsel by British Columbia, hot on the heels of his having donated $12 million to the University of British Columbia to endow “Allard Hall”, a law facility. In making his well-publicised donation, Mr Allard urged that “ethics” in law was an area that he devoutly espoused and hoped to encourage, along with what he called the “smell test”. This caused considerable disparaging merriment amongst BU’s legal eagles and, indeed, the legal fraternities of Canada, the States, the UK and Barbados, all of whom had had the advantage of reading the comments of Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy on Mr Allard’s ethics, or rather lack thereof.

Continue reading