And while Barrow is triumphalist - as we told you there is the other part of the ruling, which found that Panton had been expelled from the party in breach of the constitution.
Well, you guessed it, Barrow doesn't accept that part - in fact, he might appeal it:
Jules Vasquez
"Would you accept at least based on the judgment that the August 2024 decision expelling Miss Panton from the UDP was unlawful? You and your chairman and your deputy chairman at the time, your central executive broke the rules in expelling Miss Panton and others as well."
"But let's focus on Miss Panton. Do you accept that?"
Shyne Barrow, Leader - UDP
"I don't accept it in full. I respect the judge's position, which is similar."
Jules Vasquez
"It's not a position, sir. It's a decision that says that it was unlawful and that you breached the constitution."
"But then you can't have it both ways. You can't say the second part correct and the first one not correct. You as the leader breach the constitution. Why can't you just accept that?"
Shyne Barrow, Leader - UDP
"Sir, I can give you my position. You can't tell me what my position is. I haven't gotten a chance to speak to my lawyer whether or not we will appeal that part of the decision. So I don't want to prejudge my conversation with the legal minds and the party."
Email
Print