Businessman Harold Darrell won an appeal yesterday to have a rehearing on allegations that he owes the Bank of Bermuda more than $1.5 million.

Mr. Darrell, represented by Richard Horseman, launched an appeal after it was decided by Chief Justice Richard Ground in November 2005 that he owed the bank a total of $1.55 million.

Mr. Darrell has paid $644,000 to date.

The case will go back to the Supreme Court to decide exactly what Mr. Darrell owes the bank.

Mr. Horseman argued the Chief Justice entered the judgment for too much money in 2005.

At the time, Trott & Duncan were on the record for Mr. Darrell with Delroy Duncan as his lawyer.

In court that day, Mr. Duncan said he had not been instructed by Mr. Darrell.

Peniston & Associates were also in court claiming to be on the record for Mr. Darrell as well but also were not instructed by the client.

Only one law firm can be on the record for a client and if a firm wishes to withdraw, it must make an application to the Supreme Court.

Mr. Darrell claimed he did not know there had been a judgment as there had been a falling out with him and Trott & Duncan. He also claimed the judgment was for too much money.

Jeffrey Elkinson of Conyers, Dill & Pearman (CD&P), representing the bank, argued the bank understood Mr. Darrell was no longer contesting the claim and agreed to pay the amount due.

He said CD&P had written various letters to Trott& Duncan to solve the matter but never got any responses.

Mr. Elkinson said he believed Mr. Darrell had full knowledge of the amount he owed and the court dates and the bank didn't know there had been a falling out with Mr. Darrell and his legal team.

The Rt. Hon. Murray Stuart-Smith, speaking on behalf of the panel of judges, decided to send the case back to the Supreme Court because Mr. Justice Ground did not know that there had been a summary judgment by the bank that wasn't successful.

He explained had he known, Mr. Justice Ground probably wouldn't have ordered the judgment.

Mr. Darrell was also awarded costs for the appeal from April 2007 until yesterday.

In 2000, Mr. Darrell launched a human rights campaign against the bank.

A three-person Human Rights Tribunal sat from September 21 to 30 but the hearing was adjourned to mid-2006 because all the evidence wasn't presented during that time.

Mr. Darrell alleged he had been racially discriminated against by bank directors because they did not personally address his confidentiality breach allegation.