The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

A beach club promoter yesterday confirmed he is renewing his pursuit of Resorts World Bimini for a minimum $8m in damages, and warned: "I hope they understand we have staying power."

Garrick Edwards and his Therapy Beach Incorporated entity, fresh from a Court of Appeal verdict that upheld a $9.67m damages award against Bimini Bay's original developer, Gerardo Capo's RAV Bahamas, are now dusting off another Supreme Court action that targets their Malaysian conglomerate partner.

Legal filings from October 1, 2018, reveal that Therapy Beach is seeking the Supreme Court's permission to alter its original lawsuit by removing RAV Bahamas and a related affiliate. This will enable it to focus the claim, first lodged in 2014, on the three companies that operate the Bimini Bay property as Resorts World Bimini, a subsidiary of the giant Genting Group.

Mr Edwards, a Miami-based entertainment owner/promoter, and Therapy Beach are alleging that Resorts World "induced" RAV Bahamas to demolish their Sakara Beach Club - in violation of a Supreme Court injunction - on July 18, 2013, because it needed to establish beach and restaurant activities at Bimini as "a profit centre" for itself.

This, they claim, was despite Resorts World being aware of the existence of their Sakara Beach Club lease through its various agreements and negotiations with Mr Capo. And they also allege that they lost further business opportunities, namely the Atlantic Seafood Restaurant and other food and beverage outlets, as a result of being run out of Bimini Bay by the original developer.

Mr Edwards and Therapy are thus claiming damages against Resorts World for trespass, "inducement to breach contract" and "unlawful interference" with their economic interests on the basis that it was complicit in their fate.

Their "statement of claim" alleges that financial projections, provided by a hospitality consultant in February 2012, forecast that the Atlantic Seafood Restaurant would generate an annual net profit margin of $1.156m "solely for the restaurant component and excluding the additional promotional activities".

Based on the "loss of profits" over the original four-year lease, and a renewal for three years, Mr Edwards and Therapy Beach are claiming a minimum $8m based on that seven-year period and the restaurant profits alone.

Mr Edwards told Tribune Business yesterday that he had developed plans for at least four beach and restaurant sites at Bimini Bay, none of which will now be developed after RAV Bahamas' new relationship with Resorts World got in the way.

He argued that millions of dollars had been wasted, through the payment of damages and legal bills, as a result "of greed and ignorance" and the failure of both resort developers to negotiate with his company some five to six years ago.

Disclosing that he was still open to resolving the dispute with Resorts World Bimini without using the courts, Mr Edwards warned the company not to make Mr Capo's mistake by under-estimating him and thinking that it could wear him down through a legal war of attrition.

"All this money has been wasted because of greed and ignorance," Mr Edwards told Tribune Business. "I had a phenomenal team in Miami, celebrities were going to be driving traffic and they have none of that.

"If they [Resorts World] had heard the marketing plans we had, there was a minimum of four locations we were going to open on that beach. The business plans were done. I was well on the way with the second site [the Atlantic Seafood Restaurant].

"Celebrities would have been coming in, there would have been organic publicity and sponsorships feeding off that. We had all the hotels [in Miami] lined up; concierge services. We were doing a lot of work behind the scenes had they heard the game plan. They didn't ever want to hear it; didn't want to know what we were about."

While still willing to talk, Mr Edwards added: "I'm disappointed that all of this could have been avoided if they had the ability to come and talk to me. It would have been much better off for them.

"We were in a much better position with marketing networks and plans to drive traffic to that resort, and make it more of a success than they ever could. All they had to do was come to the table.

"I would still like the ability to speak to them and work this out reasonably without going to court, but if not I will see them in court. Hopefully, they understand we have staying power. The same thing that RAV thought, that they could beat me down, we proved that not to be true. We did it."

Tribune Business reached out to Resorts World Bimini through its Miami-based PR agency, but despite sending a detailed e-mail on the nature of its inquiries, no response was received by press time last night.

John Wilson, the McKinney, Bancroft & Hughes attorney and partner, who represented Resorts World Bimini in the battle with environmentalists over its cruise ship pier, yesterday said he was unable to comment because he had neither been instructed by the company or served with the newly-filed "statement of claim".

Resorts World Bimini, though, has previously filed a defence to the claims by Mr Edwards and Therapy Beach, and is understood to vehemently deny and dispute their allegations.

The company will be permitted to file a new defence if Mr Edwards is allowed to alter his "statement of claim". Tribune Business understands that Resorts World Bimini's argument is that it had no knowledge of Therapy Beach's lease agreement and terms with Mr Capo's RAV Bahamas, and no involvement in the demolition of the Sakara Beach Club.

However, Mr Edwards and Therapy Beach are alleging that the resort management agreement between Resorts World and RAV Bahamas clearly shows that the former must have been aware of the deal with themselves.

That agreement, executed one month before the Sakara Beach Club's demolition, contained two clauses that specifically mentioned this facility and the lease. One also referred to giving Resorts World the "right to operate and manage..... all food and beverage and similar outlets" subject to the termination of Mr Edwards' lease.

Yet RAV Bahamas had given Therapy Beach "the exclusive right to operate beach club and beach restaurant facilities" at Bimini Bay through their prior agreement, covering a seven-year period - the four-year lease, and then its three-year renewal.

That deal also required RAV Bahamas to construct, and Therapy Beach to operate, market and promote, the Atlantic Seafood Restaurant. Construction of the building began around mid-2012.

Then came the Sakara Beach Club's demolition in defiance of the Supreme Court, and the legal battle over the validity of Therapy Beach's lease. The latter alleged that it was also prevented from taking possession of the Atlantic Seafood building under the terms of its deal with RAV Bahamas, with Resorts World Bimini moving into the property two days' later and establishing its own beach club and restaurant there.

Alleging that this amounted to trespass, Therapy Beach added that it lost out on the business generated by Resorts World Bimini's ferry bringing "hundreds of visitors" to Bimini Bay from Miami. The first sailing took place two days' after the Sakara Beach Club's demolition.

Mr Edwards and his company are alleging that they had to be removed, by any means necessary, otherwise Resorts World would not have consummated its joint venture with RAV Bahamas because it did not have the beach and restaurant activities under its control.

"Resorts World's plans for the resort property included not merely the opening and operation of the casino but also the operation of other activities and profit centres within the resort property," Mr Edwards and Therapy Beach are alleging.

"It was the firm and unequivocal position of Resorts World as communicated to RAV that it could not successfully and profitably manage and operate the resort property without having a number of different profit centres throughout the resort property."

They continued: "The beach club and beach restaurant business was a vital profit centre for the resort property..... Resorts World would not enter into the joint venture with RAV with the plaintiff retaining the exclusive right to manage and operate beach clubs and beach restaurants on the resort property.

"Resorts World wanted exclusive rights to all of the food and beverage outlets on the resort property inclusive of the beach clubs and beach restaurant."