A high-stakes defamation lawsuit launched by Gaston Browne, Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda, will move forward to full judicial consideration after the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court turned away a preliminary bid to dismiss the claim from the defendants: private individual Martin DeLuca and international law firm Boies Schiller Flexner LLP.
Details of the ruling emerged this week via Maurice Merchant, the nation’s Director General of Communications, who confirmed that Browne updated his Cabinet on the outcome of the preliminary application during the executive body’s regular weekly meeting held Wednesday.
According to Merchant, court Master Carlos Cameron-Michel issued the ruling dismissing the law firm’s application on July 21. Boies Schiller Flexner is listed as the second named defendant in the original defamation filing. In its dismissal application, the firm argued that Browne’s claim failed to meet specific procedural requirements laid out in the local Civil Procedure Rules, and furthermore that the filing did not present any legally valid grounds to support a defamation claim before the court.
“After hearing oral submissions from legal teams representing both sides, and reviewing all written arguments and supporting legal precedents, the court refused the application for dismissal,” Merchant explained during an official press briefing held after the weekly Cabinet meeting.
Beyond rejecting the dismissal bid, the court handed down two key procedural orders: Boies Schiller Flexner is required to pay 1,500 Eastern Caribbean dollars in court costs by August 12, and must submit its formal defense to the defamation claim by September 4. Once the defense is filed, Browne will be granted a court-allocated window to submit a formal reply to the defense. Following that step, the case will move into scheduled case management proceedings in line with the requirements of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Addressing his Cabinet after the ruling, Browne framed the outcome as a critical procedural milestone, one that clears the way for the court to examine the core substantive allegations at the heart of his claim on their individual legal and factual merits.
“I welcome the court’s ruling, which has reaffirmed the importance of truth, fairness and accountability in public discourse,” Browne stated in comments shared by Merchant.
“While robust opposition and debate is an essential feature of any democracy, defamatory statements that unjustly damage an individual’s reputation have no place in our society,” he added.
Browne emphasized that the proceeding is more than a personal effort to clear his name. “This is not simply a personal vindication, but also a reminder that freedom of expression carries corresponding responsibilities,” he said.
It is important to note that the latest ruling only addresses the procedural question of whether the claim can proceed to full consideration. The court has not yet made any determination on the ultimate merits of Browne’s defamation allegations against the defendants.