Sunday, December 3, 2023


If you follow oil spill cases, you know that there were a number of civil actions filed against SHELL OIL COMPANY, by farmers in Barbados after 200 acres of their properties were permanently rendered unfit for cultivation by leaks in the company's seven-mile pipeline.Crops were wrecked, water supplies were contaminated, and the fertility of the soil reduced so as to be not economic or productive for agriculture. Local attorney ALRICK SCOTT negotiated the settlement on behalf of the oil company, and reportedly received substantial funds, running into the many millions of dollars, to be held in escrow and paid out to the victims.

Our investigation has revealed that only a small portion of the farmers have received their settlement money, and those who have not been properly paid accuse attorney Scott of misconduct in retaining it for his personal use and benefit, in violation of both the law and his oath as attorney. Some of the farmers have died of old age whilst waiting to be compensated, as time has passed, and their estates are now seeking payment for survivors. Scott continues to delay, and the victims fear that he has spent or otherwise dissipated their settlement money, in violation of the terms of settlement. He has been dealing in bad faith with the victims, confident that he is above the law, as he lives in a jurisdiction where corruption trumps the Rule of Law.

Letter refusing to deal with estate of an unpaid victim

Unfortunately, lawyers in Barbados have a long and sordid history of stealing client funds while being in a fiduciary capacity, owing a duty to the victims to render compensation for their injuries. Neither the courts nor the Barbados Bar Association can be relied upon to render justice for the many victims, due to the pervasive corruption among attorneys in the country, who do not fear the law nor professional discipline.   

We wonder whether Shell oil company is aware that their legal representative has defaulted upon the terms of the settlement of the oil spill dispute, which means that the litigation can be reopened, and the terms of settlement modified by the courts, in favor of the victims who were cheated out of their just compensation by Shells' designated attorney. We also wonder whether the London law firm for Shell,  HAUSFELD LLP has any liability to the victims, or to the Court, for failure to adequately supervise Scott's disbursement of the settlement proceeds in a timely and businesslike manner, and for professional negligence to Shell due to Scott's alleged misconduct.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.