Court Throws Out Shyne’s Case Over ‘UDP Red’

The Supreme Court has dismissed Moses “Shyne” Barrow’s legal challenge over the use of the colour red in the 2025 general election, calling it “moot” and filed with “unreasonable delay”.

Barrow, joined by co-claimant Alberto August, argued that the Elections and Boundaries Commission wrongly allowed candidates aligned with Tracy Panton’s Alliance for Democracy to use the UDP’s signature red. He claimed they weren’t true UDP members and accused the Commission of “acting in bad faith”.

Justice Hondora ruled that the case had already been “overtaken by events” since the election had passed and no one challenged the results. “Determining at this late stage whether the impugned decision was valid at the time it was made serves no useful purpose,” the judge wrote.

Barrow had also asked the court to stop the EBC from letting Panton’s candidates call themselves UDP. But in an email to the court before the hearing, Barrow admitted that the request “appears to have been overtaken by events” and said he would no longer pursue that part of the case.

The judge also criticised the delay in how the case was handled. Although Barrow filed the application on March 3, it wasn’t actively followed up until July. “Acting ‘promptly’ means more than just filing an application for leave on the electronic case management system and leaving the matter to lie dormant,” the ruling stated.

With the election now behind them and Panton serving as Leader of the Opposition, the court found no reason to revisit the Commission’s decision. “There is no longer any sound practical reason to adjudicate on the issue,” Justice Hondora stated.

Barrow and August were represented by attorney-at-law Matthew L. Morris. The Elections and Boundaries Commission (EBC) was represented by attorney Hector Guerra of Marine Parade Chambers.