NASSAU, BAHAMAS — The owners of Old Bahama Bay are asking the Supreme Court to clarify what their attorney says is a growing public misunderstanding surrounding a pending tax appeal involving the West Grand Bahama property.
Michael Scott KC, attorney for Lubert Adler–Old Bahama Bay (LRA-OBB) and Resorts Holdings Limited, wrote to Justice Franklyn Williams on Tuesday seeking clarification following the judge’s recent decision in separate judicial review proceedings concerning the Department of Inland Revenue’s efforts to recover outstanding real property taxes.
Scott said the judgment and its subsequent reporting have created the impression that his clients’ appeal before the Tax Appeal Commission was dismissed because it was filed out of time.
He said that is incorrect.
“The tax appeal remains pending before the Tax Appeal Commission,” Scott wrote.
According to the letter, a preliminary objection raised by the Chief Valuation Officer — including the contention that the tax appeal was brought out of time — was fully argued before the Commission, which reserved its decision.
“The tax appeal has therefore not been dismissed, whether for delay or otherwise,” Scott wrote.
The distinction is significant because the tax appeal concerns the valuation of the 1,143-acre parcel associated with the former Ginn Sur Mer development and, by extension, the real property taxes assessed against it.
The dispute over the assessment is separate from the judicial review proceedings decided by Justice Williams, although the two matters are connected to the wider dispute over the property and the Department of Inland Revenue’s attempts to recover tax arrears.
Scott said his clients did not ask the Supreme Court to determine either the merits or the timeliness of the tax appeal.
“The Applicants did not ask the Supreme Court to determine either the merits or the timeliness of the tax appeal,” he wrote.
Instead, he said those issues had already been placed before the statutory tribunal responsible for determining them and remain before that body.
“The Tax Appeal Commission has delivered no decision,” Scott wrote.
The attorney is therefore asking Justice Williams to issue a short clarification or addendum confirming that the Supreme Court did not determine or dismiss Tax Appeal Commission Appeal No. 5 of 2025, and that the question of whether the appeal was brought out of time remains before the Commission.
Scott stressed that the request was not intended to reopen or reargue the judicial review proceedings.
“We respectfully request only that the public and procedural record be clarified,” he wrote.
The tax appeal stems from a longstanding dispute over the valuation of the former Ginn project’s real estate assets and the resulting real property tax liability.
The Department of Inland Revenue had valued the 1,143-acre parcel at $26 million, while the property owners subsequently challenged the assessment and produced an alternative valuation of substantially less.
The tax dispute became intertwined with the government’s attempt to sell the property under its statutory power of sale to recover outstanding taxes.
In March 2026, Justice Williams issued an order giving effect to an undertaking by the Department of Inland Revenue and the Bahamas Treasurer not to complete the proposed sale of the property until proceedings before the Tax Appeal Commission had been completed.
The Tax Appeal Commission has since heard the parties’ arguments and reserved its decision on the preliminary objection and the substantive tax appeal.
Scott’s August 11 correspondence to the court is focused specifically on that distinction, asking that the public record make clear that the Commission has not yet ruled on the appeal or the objection concerning its timeliness.
