Martin Ellis with his three sons in St Lucia

A LEADING politician on the paradise island of St Lucia has called on three companies fighting a Dartmouth Park family through the courts to settle the case.

Martin Ellis was killed in front of his three teenage boys as the family enjoyed a Caribbean summer holiday in August 2018.

His widow, Amy Silverston, is waiting to hear whether a case to decide who was at fault and any level of compensation the firms should pay out will go before a judge – or if a settlement can be reached.

Dr Kenny Anthony, who is an MP, lawyer and former prime minister of St Lucia, has called on the firms being sued by Mr Ellis’s family to settle the case and end the Ms Silverston’s trauma Mr Ellis and his sons had visited a dam in the island’s hilly countryside when the 68-year-old businessman was electrocuted by a live cable.

Lawyers working for the family have filed papers at St Lucia’s highest court, claiming Wasco – the island’s sewage and water firm – and two construction contractors Vinci and Mega Contracting were responsible for his death. All three parties have denied the claim, stating that the family had trespassed and Mr Ellis was at fault as he had been killed whilst urinating next to a run­down pump house.

Dr Anthony – who served two separate terms as the leader of St Lucia’s Labour Party – was on hand for the family the day Mr Ellis died. His firm was retained for legal advice by the hotel the family were staying at, and on the day of the tragedy, he looked after Mr Ellis’s three teenage sons.

He believes the companies should settle for a large sum to offset the fact Mr Ellis was the family’s breadwinner and his widow, who has multiple sclerosis and uses a wheelchair, needs full-time care.

Dr Anthony told the New Journal: “I am very familiar with the facts of the claim by the Silverston Ellis family as my legal firm was initially engaged to offer advice to the family in the aftermath of the tragedy.

“I will always remember the courage and calmness of the sons of Mr Ellis despite being witnesses to the event which claimed the life of their father.

“They handled the subsequent events with poise, dignity, and calmness. They neither reacted with anger nor sought to cast aspersions on anyone, even in the face of temptations to do so.”

He added: “I can only hope that the ‘post-traumatic stress disorder’ which they suffered and possibly continue to endure, will dissipate, and fade as they adjust to the life that lies ahead.”

He said that he believed the firms were culpable and said the family had already been through too much for the companies to insist on dragging them through an elongated legal process.

“I am surprised that the claim of the family has not been settled,” he said.

“The facts are damning and compelling and, in my view, clearly point in the direction of a settlement rather than litigation.

“While the issue among the defendants may well be apportioning blame and thereafter determining liability and the quantum of damages flowing from such liability, it seems to me that this a matter which the parties ought to settle among themselves and they need to do so as quickly as possible.”

He added: “This cannot be fair to Amy, the widow of Mr Ellis. She suffers from a crippling medical condition and requires urgent financial support to meet the cost of the care she requires. Delay in the name of determining the quantum of blame to be apportioned seems to me to meet the threshold of being uncaring and insensitive.”

The three companies named in the action have all denied responsibility.