NASSAU, BAHAMAS — The long-running fraud and contract dispute between BML Properties Ltd. and China Construction America Inc. (CCA) has concluded in a New York state court.
The bench trial, overseen by New York Supreme Court Justice Andrew Borrok, examined whether BML’s $1.5 billion losses resulted from the resort developer’s overleveraged debt or construction delays.
BML alleges that CCA, the Chinese state-owned construction firm responsible for building the luxury resort Baha Mar, concealed significant delays and intentionally sabotaged the project’s March 2015 opening date to drive BML into liquidation. According to BML, this sabotage led to the loss of its $745 million investment, now totaling $1.55 billion with interest.
Sarkis Izmirlian, the original developer of the mega-resort, filed a $2.25 billion lawsuit six years ago, alleging “massive fraud” by CCA. Izmirlian claimed that CCA intentionally engaged in work slowdowns or stoppages, preventing the resort from opening to paying guests on March 27, 2015, and contributing to BML’s liquidity crisis. The development, ultimately placed into receivership, was later sold to its current owner, Hong Kong conglomerate Chow Tai Fook Enterprises.
In his closing arguments, CCA’s attorney, Mark Goodman of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, contended that no evidence was presented proving CCA’s intentional delays. Even if breaches occurred, Goodman argued that BML’s financial mismanagement was the true cause of the losses, making the delays irrelevant. He claimed that BML’s substantial debt and subsequent bankruptcy led to the liquidation losses, which BML now blames on CCA.
In response, BML’s counsel, Jacob Buchdahl of Susman Godfrey LLP, countered that the developer’s significant debt was incurred based on CCA’s assurance that Baha Mar would be ready by the March 2015 deadline. Buchdahl argued that this assurance led BML to spend millions on preparations, hiring, and advertising, including a Super Bowl ad.
Buchdahl asserted that BML was forced into bankruptcy after missing the opening date and claimed that CCA manipulated the liquidation process to serve its own interests at the expense of BML’s investment.
Loading ...
