12 november 2020
14:41
–
The court has agreed with the Willemen construction group in Mechelen in its casino dispute with Middelkerke. An expert is appointed to determine what compensation the coastal municipality must pay. Willemen demanded 8.2 million euros.
–
Willemen, one of the largest family construction companies in the country, was awarded the tender in 2016 for the construction of the new casino in Middelkerke. It would build a futuristic building in the shape of a wave in the coastal town, containing hotel rooms, a sky bar, a restaurant, meeting rooms and a casino that would be operated by Napoleon Games.
–
But Mayor Jean-Marie Dedecker pulled the plug on the project of Willemen and Napoleon Games in March last year because he did not agree with the decision of the previous city council. According to Dedecker, flaws had come to light in the award of the project, a financial plan was missing, some permits were not in order and the schedule was not complied with.
–
Conflicts of Interest
As a member of the opposition – together with the Versluys construction group, which was also a candidate – Dedecker had already objected to the first award of the file to Willemen because then there would have been a conflict of interest. The Council of State then agreed with Willemen. Attempts to resolve the dispute amicably failed. A settlement was on the table whereby Middelkerke would pay 2.5 million to end the contract, but Dedecker reportedly disagreed.
–
Willemen retired in April last year to court to challenge the unilateral termination of the agreement to build the casino. The construction group demanded damages of 8.2 million euros from the municipality for damage to reputation and the costs incurred for the demolition work of the old casino.
–
I am pleased that the court confirms that we have acted as a reliable partner.
Tom Willemen
Ceo construction group Willemen
–
–
–
The court of first instance in Bruges has now ruled in favor of Willemen and is of the opinion that the construction company did meet the contractual conditions. According to the court, a final design was on the table that had been approved by the municipality and the municipality also issued an enforceable environmental permit. The argument that Willemen would have been negligent by temporarily stopping the project is also dismissed by the judge.
–
CEO Tom Willemen says in a response that he is pleased that the court recognizes that his company has acted as a reliable partner. A legal expert is now being appointed to determine what damage Willemen has suffered and what compensation the company will receive.
–
New casino
Willemen no longer took part in the new tender for the casino. This was won by Nautilus, a collaboration between various parties, including the Democo construction group. Nautilus is going to build a casino in the form of a bollard or mooring post. In addition to a games room, it will also have a hotel, an event hall, a restaurant and an underground car park.
–
The new Middelkerk casino, which is to open in 2023, will cost 41 million euros, a lot more than the 30 million euros that the municipality had initially foreseen in its budget. That cost is likely to be higher if the municipality has to pay compensation.
–
Dedecker: ‘Willemen did not have the money for the project’
‘We will soon be sitting with our lawyers to see whether we should immediately appeal or wait for the expert’s expertise,’ responds Mayor Jean-Marie Dedecker of Middelkerke. ‘We have additional elements to appeal against the judge’s decision. We have evidence and testimonials from statements by Willemen’s CFO who says his company doesn’t have the money to build the casino and doesn’t want to do it. Willemen had entered the market to raise money for the project, but that failed. Then they let the project rot. Legally they had three years to build. But we didn’t want to wait that long, otherwise we would only have been able to start the new tender now. We had expected a court order and were ready to pay damages for the works done. But not 8.2 million of course. Willemen had only proven costs of 290,000 euros. We had an agreement on compensation of 500,000 euros, but Willemen returned to his words.
–
–
–
