A bartender who alleged that he was discriminated against by the Hamilton Princess & Beach Club has had his case thrown out by the Supreme Court.

David Lee Tucker launched legal action against the hotel after he was terminated in 2015 for serious misconduct, arguing that he was the victim of unlawful discrimination.

Mr Tucker alleged that he was mistreated because of his place of origin, his union activities, his age and disability and his links to Ayo Kimathi, a US-based firebrand speaker known for inflammatory remarks on race and sexuality who branded himself the “Irritated Genie”.

Months before his firing, Mr Tucker had organised a presentation in Bermuda by Mr Kimathi, promoted as a talk on African culture.

However, the speech was deemed “an unfiltered message of hate” that targeted gay people and White Europeans and resulted in Mr Kimathi being placed on the stop list.

Puisne Judge Shade Subair Williams ruled in a recent judgment that Mr Tucker’s case should be dismissed — citing “inordinate and inexcusable” delays moving it forward.

She added that the passage of time had meant that multiple key witnesses were no longer available to give evidence, potentially preventing either party with the opportunity for a fair trial.

Mrs Justice Williams said: “Even if these witnesses were indeed available, I am mindful that the passage of time since December 14, 2015, is so significant that it is only inevitable that these persons’ evidence at trial would be seriously afflicted by faded memories.

“This is unmitigated by the statements and reports authored on behalf of the defendant as the factual accuracy of the report on the December 14, 2015 meeting is plainly in dispute.

“For these reasons, I am bound to conclude that a fair trial is no longer possible.”

In 2017, the hotel sought to have Mr Tucker’s claims struck out.

The move was partially successful, with the court dismissing claims of unfair dismissal and that Mr Tucker had been discriminated against on the basis of age.

However, the court ruled at that time that Mr Tucker’s complaints of being discriminated against on the basis of disability and place of origin would be allowed to proceed.

This year, the hotel launched a new strikeout application, arguing that the plaintiff had failed to take any steps to move the case forward since November 1, 2018.

Mrs Justice Williams noted that Jordan Knight, counsel for the defendant, said that the delays had caused the defendant real prejudice, depriving the company of its constitutional right for a fair trial within a reasonable time frame.

Mr Tucker responded that since 2015 he had suffered a grave illness, which left him struggling financially and made it difficult to secure ongoing legal representation.

In her judgment, Mrs Justice Williams found that there had been inordinate and inexcusable delays.

She noted 2023 correspondence between counsel which appeared to highlight the plaintiff’s focus on recovering costs from the 2017 strikeout application.

She said: “Even after the plaintiff was warned on September 28, 2023 of a pending second strikeout application against him, he still took no real steps to prosecute the claim.

“As a holding strategy, the plaintiff’s litigation activity has been limited to the filing of Notices of Intention to Proceed, notices in respect of his representation in the litigation and steps proposed for his costs recovery from the first strikeout application.

“Remarkably, during the entire of the period commencing on November 1, 2018, through to March 16, 2025, when the present application was filed by the defendant, no real steps were made by the plaintiff to advance the substantive claim.”

However, the judge said it appeared Mr Tucker’s did intend to move forward with the case, noting actions that showed efforts to “financially ready himself”.

Nonetheless, Mrs Justice Williams dismissed the case for want of prosecution.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers