United Progressive Party officers face an alleged contempt filing; Attorney General’s amicus submissions come under scrutiny as the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court assesses jurisdictional finality.
St. John’s, Antigua & Barbuda — In Claim No. ANUHCV2025/0149 before the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court, a new tranche of public-interest filings—collectively referred to as the “Antigua Files”—has been placed on the court record. The filings assert that jurisdiction has now crystallized, following service, publication, and defaults pleaded across multiple defendants.
What’s New
- AG Submissions Challenged: The claimant has lodged materials questioning aspects of the Attorney General’s amicus submissions, arguing that omissions and factual sequencing affected disability accommodations and the court’s understanding of party residency and service.
- Alleged Contempt: Senior officers of the United Progressive Party are named in a Notice of Contempt, citing asserted failures to acknowledge proceedings after alleged actual and constructive notice.
- Public-Interest Framing: The filings emphasize transparency, constructive notice via publication, and the public’s right to know—positioning the case beyond a private dispute.
Jamale Pringle, Leader of the Opposition and head of the United Progressive Party (UPP). Image used in connection with reporting on sworn pleadings accepted onto the judicial record. Click image to view full size.
- WHAT THE HIGH COURT CHILD PORN & FIXED SPORT BETTING FILINGS ACTUALLY ALLEGE — AND WHY JAMALE PRINGLE’S RAGE ON TV BACKFIRES(Dec 18, 2025)
- EXCLUSIVE: Jamale Pringle and UPP Entangled in Foreign-Backed Plot to Derail Antigua’s Sovereignty(Apr 2, 2025)
- A TOTAL COLLAPSE: How Antigua’s UPP Failed and Shamed Itself into Oblivion(Mar 26, 2025)
- Attention Pam Bondi: LimeWire Is Back! Exposing the Malibu Mega Group & Child Exploitation Network(May 3, 2025)
And if…
If the court accepts that jurisdiction is fixed, the proceedings may advance to directions, enforcement mechanics, and remedies without re-litigating threshold issues. The contempt allegations—if entertained—could trigger compliance orders or further directions affecting party conduct before the court.
What Happens Next
- Judicial Review of Jurisdiction: The court will assess whether service, defaults, and publication satisfy the rules for jurisdictional finality.
- Contempt Directions: The court may set timelines for responses to the contempt notice or determine whether the threshold for contempt proceedings is met.
- Case Management: With jurisdiction settled, the matter could move to substantive phases against remaining defendants.
Download: Notice_of_Contempt_ANUHCV2025_0149-1 (Filed)
Case: ANUHCV2025/0149
Court: Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court – High Court of Justice, Antigua & Barbuda
Summary (Public-Interest Filing):
This document places on the record a Notice of Contempt alleging continued non-engagement by named officers of the United Progressive Party following asserted actual and constructive notice of proceedings. The filing requests the Court’s directions on compliance, emphasizes publication-based service and defaults, and situates the application within a public-interest framework tied to transparency and the rule of law.
What’s inside:
- Procedural history and basis for contempt (actual & constructive notice)
- Identification of named officers and asserted residency
- Relief sought and requested directions
- Annexes supporting service, publication, and notice
Status: Filed
Use: For review, citation, and public record reference
Disclaimer: This summary reflects the contents and procedural posture of a filed document. Allegations are subject to judicial determination.
Download: [DEFENDANTS AS ORIGINALLY NAMED] — NOTICE OF FACTUAL CLARIFICATION
(UPP Executive Defendants, Geographical Nexus, and Judicial Comity)
Case: ANUHCV2025/0149
Court: Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court – High Court of Justice, Antigua & Barbuda
Summary (Public-Interest Filing):
This Notice of Factual Clarification corrects and consolidates the record concerning the defendants as originally named, with particular focus on executive officers of the United Progressive Party, their residency and geographical nexus to Antigua & Barbuda, and the resulting implications for jurisdiction and judicial comity. The filing addresses sequencing and omissions that affected the Court’s understanding of party identification, service, and the proper coordination between domestic and foreign fora.
What’s inside:
- Definitive list of originally named defendants and executive roles
- Geographical nexus (residency, presence, and locus of conduct)
- Clarifications relevant to service, defaults, and jurisdiction
- Analysis of judicial comity and avoidance of parallel conflict
- Annexes supporting corrections and record integrity
Status: Filed
Use: Record clarification, citation, and public-reference download
Disclaimer: This summary reflects a filed clarification intended to assist the Court. It does not constitute findings of fact or law.
Editor’s note: Allegations remain unproven unless and until determined by the court. This report summarizes filings and procedural claims as presented on the record.
