
Joel R. Glucksman
Partner
201-896-7095 jglucksman@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Joel R. Glucksman
Date: October 22, 2015

Partner
201-896-7095 jglucksman@sh-law.comOn Sept. 15, Baha Mar Ltd., the owner and developer of the $3.5 billion Baha Mar resort in the Bahamas, had its Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection case thrown out by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. According to the Wall Street Journal, the court dismissed the case because the judge “perceived no greater good” from it continuing in a U.S. court.
In the court’s decision, the judge asserted that the Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing for Baha Mar Ltd. fell outside U.S. jurisdiction, according to a Travel Weekly report. The reason was that the case involved the economic interests of the Bahamas; therefore, the court felt that the decision should take place there.
The judge’s decision to dismiss the case was based on the opinion of the Bahamian Supreme Court which stated that the project’s stakeholders felt the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case should be in the Bahamas. Further, the judge felt that a consensual decision needed to be reached between Baha Mar Ltd. and its primary creditors China Construction America and the Export-Import Bank. Had there been a mutual decision to seek bankruptcy protection, the judge stated that the case would have continued and a final resolution would have been reached in the U.S.
The decision was supported by China Construction America and the Export-Import Bank of China as well as by Baha Mar’s lesser ranking creditors because they had requested a dismissal. The group argued that the case needed to be decided by a court with jurisdiction over the Bahamian government, and the U.S. Bankruptcy court does not. Therefore, the group’s request was to have the case thrown out to clear the way for bankruptcy proceedings in the Bahamian Supreme Court.
After Baha Mar Ltd. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S., the Bahamian government opposed the filing. The government argued that the case needed to be decided and resolved under Bahamian law, not in the U.S. Further, the Bahamian government stated that it would not recognize or uphold any decision made outside of the Bahamas. Then, according to a Reuters report, after months of negotiations, the government sought to have Baha Mar Ltd. removed from the Baha Mar project after it filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy case against it to compel the company to liquidate its remaining assets.
However, Baha Mar Ltd. argued that Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection was the best option for the company to refinance and continue development on the project.
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court judge did allow the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case for Northshore Mainland Services Inc., a subsidiary of Baha Mar, to continue. According to Travel Weekly, this subsidiary is located and incorporated in Florida because it oversees all Baha Mar Ltd.’s U.S. operations.
The judge asserted that the case should serve as a guide for the two parties to resolve the bankruptcy dispute. While there are no indications of how the case will go, the judge did state that Northshore Mainland’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy case will proceed throughout the bankruptcy proceedings in Bahamian Supreme Court.
Following the decision, Baha Mar Ltd. officials explained in a statement that the company will seek alternatives to resolving the debt load on the project. One of those alternatives was a restructuring proposal submitted to the Bahamian Supreme Court that called for the removal of CCA Bahamas. Baha Mar’s major creditor and general contractor, from the project. This move would wipe out the $72 million debt load owed to CCA Bahamas for work on the project. The court is set to make a ruling on the new proposal in November.
In a separate decision, the Bahamian Supreme Court appointed a trustee to oversee the Baha Mar project. This trustee was given the authority to develop an alternative to Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. The court also asserted that there will be a “wind down” date established where the Bahamian government will take control of the project to oversee its completion.
Are you a creditor in a bankruptcy? Have you been sued by a bankrupt? If you have any questions about your rights, please contact me, Joel Glucksman, at 201-806-3364.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Business mediation is a confidential, voluntary process in which a neutral third party helps companies negotiate a resolution to a commercial dispute without going to trial. Because working with a mediator is very different from litigating in the courtroom, it is important to understand how commercial mediation works, when it makes sense for your dispute, […]
Author: Paul Grossman

The five most common causes of construction defect litigation are design defects, substandard materials, workmanship defects, code violations, and subsurface defects. Because these flaws can compromise a building’s integrity, functionality, or safety, they frequently lead to disputes involving multiple parties and high financial stakes. Key takeaways: What is Construction Defect Litigation? Construction litigation is complex, […]
Author: Paul Grossman

The most effective ways to protect your business in a divorce are put in place before one begins: a prenuptial or postnuptial agreement, clean separation of business and personal finances, and divorce contingencies built into your operating or buy-sell agreements. If divorce is already underway, the priorities shift to establishing how the business is classified […]
Author: Jay McDaniel

The most common franchise disputes involve breach of contract, franchise termination and non-renewal, intellectual property rights, territorial encroachment, royalty and fee payments, franchisor support obligations, and violations of state franchise laws such as the New Jersey Franchise Practices Act. Franchisors and franchisees can often resolve these conflicts by providing written notice detailing the dispute and […]
Author: Paul Grossman

New Jersey businesses must manage legal and reputational risk together because modern disputes play out on two fronts at once: the legal proceeding itself and the court of public opinion, where customers, employees, investors, and business partners often reach conclusions long before a judge or jury has had the opportunity to evaluate the facts. Success […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

No. An eviction does not automatically end a tenant’s obligation to pay rent. Post-eviction rent claims are common because recovering possession resolves who has the right to occupy the premises, but it does not extinguish the tenant’s contractual obligations under the lease. Whether unpaid or future rent remains owed depends on three factors: the lease’s […]
Author: Donald M. Pepe
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!