In The Bahamas, legal counsel for the group Turtlegrass told the Supreme Court on September 28, 2026, that developers of the Rosewood Exuma project added a 390-foot seawall to their plans after public consultation had already concluded. The challenge argues that this massive structure was hidden from the public despite its potential to cause significant environmental damage to the surrounding bay.
Fred Smith, KC, argued the breakwater, which would be roughly 40 feet wide, was never vetted. He claimed the environmental impact assessment lacked details, and the Department of Environmental Planning and Protection failed to require new studies after the dock shifted. The government countered that fresh consultation for every change is unworkable. Smith stated, “This is a matter of fairness. Full stop.” He emphasized that developers possessed drawings of the extended dock months before the initial assessment, yet withheld them from the public.
The legal challenge examines whether the government’s approval process violated environmental regulations. The developer’s consultants had argued against relocating the dock because it conflicted with luxury-focused super yacht berthing plans. Turtlegrass maintains that the approval process denied them the information needed for informed participation, and the court must now determine if the Director’s decision was legally sound.