Delivering a 30-page judgment, Justice Kimberly Cenac-Phulgence denied Chastanet’s request for an interlocutory injunction against Tourism Minister Dr. Ernest Hilaire and the Citizenship by Investment Board, noting that the former prime minister did not provide concrete proof of illegality, fraud, or mismanagement in the administration of the programme.
Background to the Case
Chastanet had sought to restrain the defendants from granting or approving citizenship applications linked to three projects:
- the Galaxy Canelles Resort Project,
- the Galaxy National Infrastructure Improvement Programme, and
- the Bemax Rock Hall Housing Development Project.
He alleged that these ventures were being conducted unlawfully accusing the defendants of underselling passports, circumventing due diligence requirements, and breaching procurement and finance laws. He further claimed that agreements signed after 2021 by the new government were irregular and designed to benefit private developers at the expense of the state.
The defendants, represented by Senior Counsels Douglas Mendes and Anthony Astaphan rejected the allegations, describing them as politically motivated and unsupported by evidence. They informed the Court that Cabinet had already suspended and terminated both the Bemax and Galaxy infrastructure projects and ordered a full review of the CIP Act and Regulations earlier this year.
Court’s Findings
Justice Cenac-Phulgence ruled that Chastanet’s case “failed to establish a serious issue to be tried”, observing that the allegations of corruption and discounted passport sales were based on hearsay and developments in other jurisdictions, not on verifiable evidence from Saint Lucia.
“It is not clear from any of the evidence provided by the claimant that there is underselling. That evidence at this stage is based on what the claimant alleges is happening in other countries and what he has been told by third parties,” the judgment stated.
The judge further noted that since the Enterprise Projects had been suspended and the agreements terminated, granting an injunction would be “entirely abstract” and serve no useful purpose. The Court added that such a measure could damage the CIP’s international reputation and negatively affect the economy, given that the programme contributes about 10% of Saint Lucia’s GDP.
She also criticized the claimant for failing to comply with pre-action protocols and for filing the injunction months after publicly signalling his intent to do so, citing the equitable maxim that “equity aids the vigilant, not the indolent.”
The Court ordered Chastanet to pay costs to both Dr. Hilaire and the CIP Board, to be agreed upon within 21 days or assessed by the Court if no agreement is reached.
The substantive judicial review claim challenging the legality of the CIP agreements and administration has been scheduled for first hearing on January 26, 2026 .
.