The widow of former Cambridge Beaches president Thaddeus Trott is to be thrown out of her home on the property after losing a lengthy legal battle, The Royal Gazette can reveal.

Roberta Trott also faces a legal bill in the region of $150,000 and must pay Cambridge Beaches around $325,000 for rent that the Sandys resort could have charged for All Spice Cottage.

The hefty bill follows a Court of Appeal ruling that no lease existed for her to continue living at All Spice Cottage, which she shared with Mr. Trott, who died in 1997.

Cambridge Beaches gave Mrs. Trott notice to leave the cottage in February, 1998 and went to court when she refused to move.

On Friday, the Appeals Court overturned a Supreme Court ruling last year which had ordered Cambridge Beaches and its owners Frascati Hotel Company Ltd. to draw up a lease for the cottage for five years.

Cambridge Beaches president Michael Winfield said yesterday: "It's very sad for her. It could all have been resolved amicably in the beginning but she was not willing to do so.

"I feel relieved. It's been a long and unpleasant situation, one which we would all have wished to have avoided.

"It's very unfortunate that we had to go through the whole legal process, but the right legal decision has been reached on behalf of us.'' The judgment takes effect immediately, and Mr. Winfield said he expected Mrs.

Trott to be out of the cottage "in the near future''.

Appeals Court President Sir James Astwood ruled that there was no evidence that a lease Mr. Trott drew up for himself for All Spice Cottage was ever put to the board of directors at Cambridge Beaches.

"It amounts to an `agreement' with himself for himself,'' wrote Sir James.

"All the parties have given evidence that Mr. Trott's management style was autocratic, that when he gave an instruction, he expected it to be carried out.'' But he added that a proposed agreement "was never executed. The draft copies of the agreements are incomplete, unsigned and in draft concept''.

He continued: "It could not be clearer that Trott intended to keep the board in the dark concerning his negotiations with himself and it is no defence to offend against the provisions of the Companies Act and then advance an argument on behalf of the beneficiary of Trott's conduct that was `autocratic in nature'.'' Sir James concluded: "No lease or agreement was ever entered into by Trott and the plaintiffs.'' Mrs. Trott's lawyer Georgia Marshall was off the Island yesterday and a spokeswoman for Marshall and Company said no-one else could comment on the case.