The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

An attorney and grandson of Sir Milo Butler has successfully fought-off a BISX-listed retail group's bid to appoint a receiver over his 25 percent interest in the family's trust.

Craig F. Butler, principal of the law firm that bears the same name, persuaded Justice Neil Brathwaite to reject AML Foods efforts to have Ed Rahming, the accountant and founder of Intelisys Ltd, take control of a stake potentially valued at $1.65m.

The Supreme Court judge, in a verdict released yesterday, found that the receiver's appointment would be "excessively oppressive" given that Mr Butler is seeking to sell a property appraised at $$1.013m. Should that price be realised, the proceeds would exceed the $862,287 debt that the Solomon's and Cost Right owner is seeking to collect from him.

The legal battle effectively pits cousin against cousin, as AML Foods' chairman is Franklyn Butler. And among the other beneficiaries of the trust set up by Mr Butler's father, Raleigh, who was one of Sir Milo's sons, is Loretta Butler-Turner, the former FNM MP and Cabinet minister who is now a Water & Sewerage Corporation consultant. The interests of herself and her other siblings are not impacted by Mr Butler's battle with AML Foods.

Justice Brathwaite's verdict reveals that the dispute stems from a default judgment that AML Foods obtained against Mr Butler on June 29, 2021, for the $862,287 plus damages to be assessed with interest and costs. The BISX-listed food retail and franchise group pushed for Mr Rahming's appointment as receiver over claims that the attorney, who once sought the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) nomination for Nassau Village, was "stalling" on settling the debt.

Mr Butler was examined on his assets, income and means in 2022, disclosing that he owns a property on Alice Street in Nassau through his company, CFB Corporate Services. He also revealed that he had "substantial interests" under a will trust that was settled by his father, which provides that he will "receive at least a 25 percent share of the residue of the trust" once it expires in 2033.

AML Foods argued that Mr Butler admitted this interest "amounts to at least $1.65m", and that he is also entitled under the trust's terms to a $50,000 payment as well as "reasonable legal fees for dealing with the assets of the will trust". As a result, the BISX-listed food group argued that "the appointment of a receiver will therefore not be fruitless".

It also asserted that Mr Butler was unlikely to inform it of his receipt of any assets from the trust, and that he would "dissipate" them rather than use the proceeds to settle the debt. But Mr Butler, who defended himself, testified in an affidavit that his Alice Street property was appraised at $1.013m on June 23, 2023, and had been listed for sale.

"He further stated that he was contacted by Gavin Watchorn, president and chief executive of [AML Foods], who proposed that he sign a sales agreement giving the judgment creditor the right to sell the property if the sale is not completed by the real estate agent within six months," Justice Brathwaite recorded.

Mr Butler said he was prepared to convey the Alice Street property to AML Foods as "final and full settlement" of his $862,287 debt, and suggested the receiver's appointment would be overkill given that the company had already obtained a charge, or lien, over his shares in CFB Corporate Services. As a result, appointing a receiver would be "disproportionate" as AML Foods was seeking to attach assets of far greater worth than the debt outstanding.

Justice Brathwaite agreed. While AML Foods was entitled to pursue all assets to satisfy the debt, he added that it had secured a lien over a building whose $1.013m appraised value exceeded the debt owed by a six-figure sum. "While it is in the interests of justice that orders of the court be obeyed, it is also right that steps are taken to ensure compliance are not excessively oppressive," he wrote.

Noting that Mr Rahming's appointment as receiver would also increase costs, which were likely to be borne by Mr Butler, the Supreme Court judge also suggested that the risk of dissipation of trust assets was restricted given that its final winding-up is not scheduled to take place until 2023.

"In the circumstances of this case, I do not consider it just and convenient to order the appointment of a receiver at this time," he added. "The situation might be different if there was evidence that the damages had been assessed and far exceeded the value of the building, but that is not the case."