The Court of Appeal has overturned a contempt ruling against industrial relations consultant Anderson E. Carty, setting aside in its entirety a November 2023 decision by the Industrial Court. The appellate ruling, dated March 27, 2026, marks the conclusion of a protracted legal dispute stemming from remarks Carty made on a live radio broadcast, according to Antigua News Room.
The original contempt finding arose from statements Carty made on Observer Radio's Connecting with Dave Lester Payne programme, in which he asserted that the legal system was "compromised," operated against the "little man," and was "in chaos at almost every level." The Industrial Court found that those remarks had scandalized the court, attacked its integrity, and brought it into disrepute. The court further concluded that Carty's statements created the perception that the Industrial Court was biased in favour of employers and that the administration of justice could not be trusted.
As a result, the Industrial Court ordered Carty — described as both an Industrial Relations Consultant and an Officer of the Court — to retract his statements, submit a written apology for the court's approval, and broadcast that apology live on the same programme. Carty refused, maintaining his innocence and arguing that the Industrial Court lacked the jurisdiction to impose such an order.
A notable development emerged during the appellate proceedings when the Attorney General's Chambers, representing the Industrial Court, conceded that the court had indeed lacked jurisdiction to make the contempt order. Nevertheless, counsel argued that the order remained binding unless and until it was overturned by the Court of Appeal.
As reported by Antigua News Room, the appellate panel was visibly troubled by that submission, questioning how an order issued without jurisdiction could be regarded as legally binding. While the panel appeared prepared to deliver sharp criticism of the Industrial Court's handling of the matter, it ultimately chose to reserve its comments on that point.
The Court of Appeal set aside the Industrial Court's decision in full and awarded costs of $2,000 against the Respondent.
