Old Fort Bay Company Limited (Appellant) v Old Fort Bay Company Limited and another (Respondents) (The Bahamas)

Case summary

Case ID

JCPC/2025/0001

Jurisdiction

Bahamas

Parties

Appellant(s)

OLD FORT BAY PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION LIMITED

Respondent(s)

OLD FORT BAY COMPANY LIMITED

NEW PROVIDENCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED

Issue

Whether certain areas of land in a residential development are “common areas”, who owns the land in question, and whether the developer is entitled to expand a marina in the development.

Facts

This appeal concerns an upmarket residential-led development at Old Fort Bay, New Providence Island, Bahamas, comprising of 185 lots (“the Development”). The Respondents were responsible for developing the Development and are together referred to as “the Developer”. The Appellant is a company set up to manage the common areas of the Development. The Development is bounded by Old Fort Bay beach and the sea to the north. The Developer created a number of canals and waterways to enable other lots to access the sea. It also laid out roadways and created a number of “common areas” (eg: tennis courts). Lots on the development were sold off by conveyances in a standard form, with some changes to the wording of the standard form made over time. There are three parties to each conveyance: OFBC, the POA and the purchaser of the particular lot. Under the conveyances, the POA is responsible for maintaining and repairing the roadways, drains, common areas and waterways of the Development. These services paid for by the purchasers through a rentcharge. In 2003-2004, the Developer constructed a marina on one of the canals and in 2013, the Developer was granted government approval for an expansion to the marina. This appeal concerns a dispute between the POA and the Developer concerning the designation and ownership of the “common areas”, as well as the marina expansion. In the Supreme Court of The Bahamas, neither party was wholly successful. On appeal to the Court of Appeal (the “CA”), the POA’s appeal was dismissed on all grounds and the Developer’s appeals were upheld. The CA refused to grant the POA leave to appeal to the JCPC. The POA now appeals directly to the JCPC.

Date of issue

2 January 2025

Case origin

PTA

Back to top