National

Coalition Leader Loses Appeal

NASSAU, BAHAMAS – Coalition of Independents leader Lincoln Bain loses bid to overturn a Supreme Court judgment ordering him to pay thousands.

Published

2 years ago

September 16, 2022

Our News

NASSAU, BAHAMAS – Coalition of Independents leader Lincoln Bain lost a bid to overturn a Supreme Court judgment ordering him to pay thousands of dollars. While Bain lost that part of the appeal, he did succeed in avoiding a jail sentence.

The decision on the case involving the Coalition of Independents leader was handed down in the Court of Appeal.

The COA justices decided not to overturn a Supreme Court judgment ordering Bain to pay $64,000 to a woman who trusted him with her life savings in 2010.

They also ruled in favor of quashing the default prison sentence of 90 days that the judge ordered him to serve if he doesn’t pay.

On December 6, 2021, Justice Cheryl Grant-Thompson found that Bain had breached an April 2010 agreement to hold $40,000 in trust for Zinnia Rolle for three years, with an annual 10 percent interest rate.

At maturity, Rolle should have received $53,240, inclusive of interest. By the time the court delivered its judgment, interest had increased the amount owed to $64,000.

In an addendum to the judgment delivered on January 12, 2022, Grant-Thompson said that Bain would serve 90 days in prison if he failed to pay the money by February 28.

The court also found that Bain’s company, Bani Shoe Warehouse, had breached a may 2010 contract with Rolle to sell shoes for her.

Grant-Thompson said she did not believe Bain’s claim that an employee had forged his signatures on the agreements at Rolle’s request after his shoe store burned down in November 2010.

The employee admitted to committing the criminal act at the trial; however, he could not reproduce Bain’s signature while on the witness stand.

Lawyers for Bain and Bani Shoe Warehouse sought to have the judgments set aside, claiming that the judge did not properly assess the evidence.

Sir Michael said it was “plainly wrong” for the trial judge to make an addendum to her ruling without hearing further arguments.