Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x

Shareholder will fire existing members of Supervisory Board of Directors at GEBE, install new board.

gebesupervisoryboard0305201GEBE  Supervisory Board of Directors lost court case.

PHILIPSBURG:--- The Shareholder representatives of GEBE will be holding their shareholders meeting on Thursday morning May 26th 2016 as ordered by the Court of First Instance and they will dismiss the three remaining members of the supervisory board of directors namely, Rene Richardson, Ed Gumbs, and Zylena Barry. The shareholder will then appoint the seven new members of the board namely:-

1. Oral Gibbes
2. Tazio Bervoets
3. Agnes Monte
4. Romeo Pantophlet
5. Sandy Offringa
6. Roy Marlin
7. Patrice Gumbs.

Those are the main agenda points for Thursday’s meeting but the Supervisory Board of Directors could easily add a new agenda point to appoint the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) William Brooks now that the Court of First Instance ruled against the Supervisory Board members who took the Shareholder to Court last week to stop Brook’s appointment. It is indeed clear that William Brooks did not complete the screening process and the shareholder had intended to appoint Brooks and the COO Veronica Jensen Webster on conditions which is if by any chance they fail the screening process they will vacate the position immediately.
In a written statement Attorney at Law Jairo Bloem said the following:-
“NV GEBE, Richardson and Gumbs, (“The Plaintiff parties”) are, despite the fact that they did not win the case, pleased with the outcome and in particular the considerations by the Court of First Instance. It should be first and foremost noted that the Security Service Sint Maarten confirmed on Friday, May 13, 2016 that Government has not even initiated the security screening process. During the court hearing on Thursday, May 19, 2016, Government acknowledged that it mistakenly did not start the security screening process, but had meanwhile corrected this mistake. If it was not for plaintiffs actions, a person might have been appointed as director of NV GEBE for whom the security screening process was not even been initiated, an act that is surely not sanctioned by law.

More importantly, the Court of First of instance stated that if Government intends to appoint someone who is not yet been approved by the Security Service Sint Maarten, but for whom the screening process has started, Government should take proper measures to reduce the risks that can follow from a security screening.
The best interest of NV GEBE is served by persons only exercising a so-called confidential function for which a security screening and approval is required by the Security Council, after they pass the security screening. Moreover, since a possible decision by the Security Service Sint Maarten to not approve an appointed person, does not derogate to possible contractual obligations incurred as a consequence of an appointment under civil law or civil servant law.
The plaintiff parties once again hope that Government will take requisite measures to safeguard against violation of a confidential function and, equally important, prevent NV GEBE from unnecessary incurring damages in case the Security Service Sint Maarten does not approve of the appointed person.”

Click here to read Courts verdict on the Appointment of the CEO.

Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.x


Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x