The time set for the Imperial Pacific International (IPI) to continue its work on Imperial Palace casino-resort in Saipan has already been reconsidered for several times. But this time further reconsideration may not happen. Amid all the investigations that took nearly five years and still couldn’t reach a conclusion, a new event turned the things upside down for the IPI. The Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) has spent a long time dealing with IPI issues and the Chief Judge of CNMI Ramona Manglona is attributing the law on IPI. She said the company should either surpass its obligations to employees or face receivership. She set March 1 as the deadline for IPI to comply with the obligations according to Asian Gaming Brief.
IPI started to pay all its workers their due payments which are almost several months’ unpaid salary. The company didn’t mention anything about the source of that money. Neither did it show any reason behind its inability to pay the due earlier. Moreover, the company required to put around $800,000 into an escrow account to ensure the payment of the employees in case the history repeats itself in near future.
Situation Could be More Grave
If companies fail to comply with financial obligations by earlier in March, the CNMI Judge will make the company undergo receivership and start the procedure to liquidate all its assets. It makes IPI scramble to mitigate all its debt. The Judge already got requested to lift her prohibition on the company’s activities. However, she denied the request. All the equipment that was brought to the construction site of Imperial Palace will be inert until the verdict changes. But no prohibition was attributed to administrative and other employees to keep them from their works going.
By the strictness of the construction stop-work regulation, IPI can easily conclude that meeting the launch deadline of February 28 will not be possible for it. The company can also realize the trouble it is about to face. It seems ill fate is not stopping following the company’s trail. This delay will lead the company to infringement of contract. Though by the previous behavior of the IPI, it can be presumed that it is going to deny it’s all responsibilities.