The Tribune

By RASHAD ROLLE

Tribune Staff Reporter

rrolle@tribunemedia.net

PETER Nygard is seeking damages from the government, claiming in writs filed in the Supreme Court this week that his constitutional rights have been breached and his property, Nygard Cay, has been wrongfully seized by the country’s provost marshal.

A hearing was held yesterday connected to the matter.

Mr Nygard wanted the court to impose an injunction preventing the deputy provost marshal from seizing his property, but that became moot as his property was seized on Friday.

Instead, the Supreme Court granted the Save the Bays/Coalition to Protect Clifton Bay permission to be added as a defendant in Mr Nygard’s action against the commissioner of police (the provost marshal), Tommy Sands, the deputy provost marshal, and the attorney general because of the land seizure.

One of Mr Nygard’s lawyers argued in an affidavit that the provost marshal has no jurisdiction to seize land and tenements in The Bahamas.

Mr Sands first entered Nygard Cay pursuant to a writ on September 27, according to the affidavit, noting that this was days after lawyers for the wealthy fashion designer wrote the deputy registrar of the Supreme Court to say the writs had been improperly issued and called for them to be withdrawn or amended.

Mr Nygard’s legal action is the latest development in the long-running saga between the mogul and activist groups.

It follows a petition by Save the Bays to have Nygard Cay sold to satisfy the $2.2m debt Mr Nygard owes in legal costs from alleged illegal dredging activities.

Mr Nygard had engaged in unauthorised dredging and construction of a groyne on the sea bed located south east of his property, Save the Bays alleged.

The Tribune understands that at yesterday’s hearing, a lawyer for the Office of the Attorney General informed the court that no instructions were given for a lawyer to appear on behalf of the provost marshal and such instructions would have to be sought.

The lawyer said if he does not receive such instructions, the provost marshal would have to make alternative arrangements for representation.

The matter was held before Justice Keith Thompson.