‘Bigger Biggs’ has no fundamental opposition to farmers crossing his land – Lawyers

Businessman and landowner Leon ‘Bigger Biggs’ Samuel has no fundamental opposition to farmers continuing to have the right of way across his land at Rabacca.

Businessman and landowner Leon ‘Bigger Biggs’ Samuel

This is according to counsel Jomo Thomas, who, along with the Elizabeth Law Chambers provides legal representation to Samuel. The lawyer made this clear at a press conference held at his law chambers on Wednesday, June 24.

The press conference was held to indicate that the claim filed by Samuel in the High Court for review of a survey conducted on lands in Rabacca, will be heard by the court.

This is because Justice Esco Henry has, this week, dismissed an application by the attorney general, on behalf of the Governor General, to have the claim struck out.

Samuel is seeking a declaration that lands in survey plan no C1842 do not depict crown land, as the State asserts, and that all of the 3.5450 acres of land nearest to the Rabacca River, and 5.4321 acres nearest to the Lady Jane/Langley Park Dry River, as shown in the survey diagram C1842, completed by Alrick Williams, licensed land surveyor, and lodged at the Land and Surveys Department in April 2019, are lands beneficially owned by Samuel/Bigger Cement and Aggregate Incorporated.

Samuel had attempted to block the surveyors from carrying out this survey in March 2019, and was arrested and charged for obstruction at the Georgetown Magistrate’s court. Samuel challenged the process of the survey because he asserts that the only basis on which that action could have been taken is if there are crown lands present there, but he does not believe that there are crown lands there.

The land in Rabacca must be crossed by farmers who wish to get to their lands in Bower Mountain.

It was the position of the State that the survey was being conducted to provide an alternate route for the farmers to get to Bower Mountain which did not have to pass through Samuel’s lands.

However, Thomas explained on Wednesday, referring to the issue raised of farmers traversing Samuel’s land, “I must say that there is no fundamental contradiction in Bigger Biggs’ view as to the continuation of the right of way across his land.”

“When he took the action, what he was saying is that the State cannot dictate to him what can happen on his lands because the State had no involvement in those lands; whereas the State was asserting a right that it had some lands there and therefore people can freely pass through,” the counsel informed.

Yesterday, Akin John of Elizabeth Law Chambers told SEARCHLIGHT that while Samuel does not have any “fundamental contradiction” to farmers having access to their lands, this is reliant on there being an agreement between him and the farmers.