The Tribune

By EARYEL BOWLEG


Tribune Staff Reporter


ebowleg@tribunemedia.net

COALITION of Independents leader Lincoln Bain still owes $90,000 from a long-standing civil judgment stemming from a failed investment dating back to 2010, nearly six months after the UK-based Privy Council declined to hear his appeal in the matter.

A legal notice published in The Tribune yesterday requires Mr Bain to appear in person before Supreme Court Registrar Renaldo Toote on March 12, 2026, as enforcement efforts intensify over the unpaid judgment.

The renewed enforcement effort follows Mr Bain’s public assertions of financial strength during the 2023 by-election season, when he filed asset declarations showing a net worth of about $1.8m, including substantial holdings in securities and real estate, along with a savings account balance exceeding $40,000. The declaration listed no liabilities.

“I’ve been in the business for a very long time from my early 30s,” he said at the time. “I’ve run many, many retail businesses in this country and other businesses. I am an IT professional for a very long time and I made some good investments when I was in my 20s and younger, and they paid off.”

The dispute centres on a claim by Zinnia Rolle, who obtained a Supreme Court judgment in December 2021 ordering Mr Bain and his company to repay $64,000. That ruling was later upheld by the Court of Appeal. In October 2025, Mrs Rolle was also awarded a further $26,000 in costs after the Privy Council declined to entertain Mr Bain’s appeal.

The notice published yesterday included two documents. One, dated September 4, 2025 and drawn up by Pyfrom Farrington Chambers, orders Mr Bain to disclose detailed financial records ahead of the hearing.

“You are further required to produce at the hearing such documents in your possession or under your control as are described below: Any and all documents which set out details of your revenue stream, expenses and cash flows.

“Any and all accounts which show your financial performance and position for the years 2023 to present date. You must obey this order. If you do not, you may be arrested and then sent to prison for contempt of court.”

The second document, dated November 15, 2025, was issued by Mrs Rolle’s attorneys and demanded payment of $90,000 within 14 days, reflecting the original judgment sum and the additional costs awarded in Privy Council proceedings.

Mr Bain told The Tribune he has not received any notice and insisted the matter had been handed to his attorney, describing the public filing as politically motivated.

“I don’t understand why a notice have to be put in the papers when I have an attorney, they have an attorney and it appears that this thing is being used as a political football,” he said.

He said his lawyer had been engaged in negotiations and requested proof of life from the complainant before proceeding further.

“That’s all she asked for, and she was willing to settle,” he said. “But we didn’t hear from them anymore, and now we’re just seeing something in the paper, which tells me that this, of course, is political theater and like we said, my lawyer is supposed to deal with it, and she’s going to deal with it.”

Mr Bain claimed his legal team had not heard from Mrs Rolle since the original Supreme Court proceedings and sought confirmation of her identity before continuing discussions. He said no response was received.

Mr Bain dismissed any suggestion that the unresolved civil judgment could affect his political ambitions, framing it as a private dispute.

“This has nothing to do with the public funds that we’ve been experiencing from the politicians all this time,” he said. “Philip ‘Brave’ Davis has had civil matters. Michael Pintard has had civil matters. This is a private civil matter between two business persons and we made every effort to do what we can within our rights. Once the lawyers cooperate and work together, then it’ll be dealt with.”

The case returns to court next month as the registrar considers whether further enforcement steps are required.