Zebec-claim against Heyliger drags on – StMaartenNews.com – News Views Reviews

PHILIPSBURG -– When there is a claim of $97 million at stake, defendants and their attorneys get very creative and they begin to use every available option to delay court procedures. This is for instance the case with the claim of real estate developer Zebec – a company of the Gioia-brothers – against Ocean Drive Properties, Danny Ramchandani, Peter Mirpuri, the St. Maarten Quarter Development Company and – last but not least – Pointe Blanche-resident Theo Heyliger.

In a ruling dated May 27, the court established that there is no group-liability, “in the sense that Ramchandani, Mirpuri and Heyliger have conspired to remove Zebec from the harbor-grounds.”

What is it all about again? Zebec won the contract for the development of a project called Dutch Village on a terrain near the harbor. Things went south when Zebec was pushed out and replace by Ocean Drive Properties. Initially, Zebec and its opponents settled the dispute with a claim of $10 million, but when Zebec discovered that it had been misled it took the case to court.

On October 31, 2023, the court ruled in an interim-decision that the St. Maarten Dutch Quarter Development Company (SMDQC) did not do anything unlawful towards Zebec and that it is therefore not liable. In 2025 the court ruled that it is authorized to reconsider this decision but that it had to apply the principles of a fair hearing. It rejected the claim against SMDQC because it lacks an incorrect legal and factual basis.

The court gave defendant Heyliger the opportunity to provide counter-evidence against the claim that he abused his authority so that the project could be granted to Ocean Drive Properties – a deal that came with a financial windfall for Heyliger.

On April 17, 2024, the court informed both parties that it would hear seven witnesses between October 14 and October 17. The court informed Heyliger’s attorney, Roland Duncan, that he had to provide proof that he had summoned the witnesses.

Om July 8, Duncan informed the court that had stepped down as Heyliger’s attorney. His replacement Chester Peterson asked the court om September 24 for a postponement of the witness-hearings. Attorneys of Zebec and SMDQC objected and the court rejects Peterson’s request because it violates the court’s obligation to prevent unreasonable delay.

On October 2, 2024, Peterson withdraws as the attorney for Heyliger. This move forced the court to postpone the witness hearings until February 2025.This time, the court threw a spanner in the works; on January 8, 2025, it reported that the judge who handled the case would be absent for an uncertain period.

In the meantime, Heyliger announced that he wants to hear just three witnesses.

On January 31, 2025, Judge Wouters, at the time the court’s vice-president, asked the apparently reinstated attorney Peterson to let him know whether the witnesses are living in or staying in St. Maarten. The judge demanded that Peterson provide this information within three days and that he submits the witnesses addresses within a month.

On February 17, Judge Wouters sends another email to Peterson because he had not heard anything from him. He gave Peterson another chance: he should deliver the requested information the next day before twelve noon.

But Peterson does not provide any information at all. This inspired the court to conclude that Heyliger no longer felt the need to hear witnesses.

A day later Judge Wouters sent another mail to Peterson, saying that he had not received any reaction and that therefore the case will go to court for a ruling.

Peterson woke up and submitted an interim-appeal; the court rejected this in a decision dated April 4.

The court concluded that Heyliger did not use the opportunity to provide counter-evidence and that therefore his unlawful actions have become a fact. The court approved the claim against Heyliger, without mentioning how much he would have to pay.

The claim against ODP remains an open question for the time being. The court gave ODP and Zebec the opportunity to state their positions in writing about the intention to reconsider the interim-ruling of October 31, 2023.

The next court hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, June 24.

Related articles:
The ZEBEC dossier>>>

###

ADVERTISEMENT