The Tribune

By RASHAD ROLLE

Tribune Staff Reporter

rrolle@tribunemedia.net

CHIEF Justice Sir Michael Barnett dismissed a petition yesterday from several people staking a claim to a 47-acre piece of land in San Salvador where billions of dollars worth of pirate treasure is rumoured to be buried.

However, the Chief Justice ruled that a certificate of title should be granted to one woman, Verna Gilbert, in recognition of 2.64 acres of the land which he ruled is a part of her inheritance.

He rejected her claim to possessory title to most of the land, however.

His ruling is the latest in the long-running dispute among various people who have sought to excavate the land.

In 2007, authorities ordered two families to vacate the site, which is located at Fortune Hill, San Salvador, after they began digging for gold and other treasure they believe is buried at the site.

As the representative of the estate of Nimrod Newton – the person granted the land by the Crown in 1876 – Dennis Bethel holds a temporary grant in relation to the land.

In 2010, he secured, on behalf of his family, a consent order to halt excavation efforts on the disputed property.

Speaking to reporters about the ruling yesterday, he said: “I think the judge’s ruling today is fair and is along the lines of what I expected and right now as it stands the matter is between the descendants of Nimrod Newton and the ruling that we now (are waiting for) from the Deputy Registrar Camille Gomez as to sorting out the probate of the estate of Nimrod Newton.

“The matter is only now between descendants of Nimrod Newton. The other adverse claimants don’t have a stake in this matter and the issue for them is over.”

The chief justice rejected all claims to possessory title of the areas outside of the 2.64 acres granted to Ms Gilbert.

Regarding his reasoning for doing this, he said: “I am satisfied that the residents at the time farmed various parcels, not with a view to acquiring any ownership but simply because the land was there and everybody joined hands in helping each other.

“Actual ownership was limited to portions granted to them by the Crown or acquired by conveyance. I am not satisfied that anyone farmed on any other person’s property with a view to acquiring possession of that property or ousting the owners’ title.

“As I said, areas that people farmed were not on the evidence delineated by any fence or other demarcation to show exclusive ownership of any portion. No one as it were had his or her ‘flag flying over the property’.”