According to a communication dated 7 December 2022, the Public Lands Commission (PLC) has announced that the Cayman Islands Water Sports Association (CIWA ) rejected the application.
In that communication, PLC said the refusal was due to insurance concerns.
Specifically, PLC states:
The Acting Chief Executive of the Department of Local Administration and Land has obtained urgent legal advice on CIWA’s application to host an event from Crownland at Seven Mile Public Beach without insurance.
Based on the responses received, the Commission unfortunately refuses to grant permission to hold events on royal lands unless applicants have set up adequate liability/indemnity insurance.
This is due to the potential liability facing the CI government in the event of an accident at Seven Mile Public Beach.
Hosting an event without CIWA insured exposes not only the CI Government, but also the Public Land Commission to possible tort (personal injury) lawsuits.
In a strange twist, around the same time, the PLC apparently allowed some groups to dig a hole and light a fire near the governor’s house. This caused a stir on social media, with members of the public raising questions about the safe conduct of fire pit activities and the potential danger to members of the public.
Upon learning of these two incidents, Planning Minister Jay Ebanks questioned why CIWA’s application for Seven Mile Beach was denied due to liability issues. Similar public liability issues surrounding fire activity.
Ebanks said of PLC’s alleged handling of two scenarios:
The Cayman Islands Water Sports Association is one of the only associations that is 100% Caymanis and is aimed at young Caymanis who want to participate in fun or competitive water sports activities.
It is unfair to deprive children of this sporting opportunity and treat them this way.
What do decisions like this tell our children? Decisions like this seem to deprive children of every opportunity, bit by bit.
Ebanks now believes that the CIWA application and the application on behalf of the Fire Pit Revelers appear to involve public liability issues in both cases, with neither party claiming responsibility for their activities. I’m looking for an answer as to why I was treated differently if I didn’t have proper insurance.
