Global Black Voices: News from around the World
- Caribbean Court of Justice found no egregious error of law nor risk of a gross miscarriage of justice in the appellate judgment.
- Justice Nigel Niles entered default judgments after Rodrigues failed to file a defence within prescribed timeframes.
- The Full Court applied CPR 12.03, finding Rodrigues gave no reasonable explanation and his defence had no real prospect of success.
Social media commentator Mikhail Rodrigues, popularly known as the “Guyanese Critic,” alongside his media outlet, They Break News Inc., has reached the end of his legal remedies after the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) dismissed his application for special leave to appeal a $22.5 million defamation judgment.
The ruling, handed down on October 14, 2026, by a CCJ panel comprising Justices Denys Barrow, Peter Jamadar, and Chile Eboe-Osuji, upholds decisions made by Guyana’s lower courts and brings an end to the defamation lawsuit brought by Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed.
In dismissing the application, the region’s highest court declared it was satisfied that there was “no egregious error of law in, nor risk of a gross miscarriage of justice arising from” the judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal of Guyana on April 24, 2026.
The legal battle stems from default judgments initially issued by High Court Justice Nigel Niles. Justice Niles ruled against Rodrigues and his company after they failed to file a defence within the legally prescribed timeframe, ordering them to pay $22.5 million in damages along with $3.5 million in punitive damages.
Rodrigues subsequently sought to set aside the default judgment. Represented by attorneys Sanjeev J. Datadin and Mohanie Anganoo of Whitworth Chambers, his legal team contended that the trial judge placed excessive weight on procedural rules rather than considering an extension of time to decide the case on its merits.
However, the Full Court of Guyana—presided over by Justices Fidela Corbin-Lincoln and Nicola Pierre—firmly upheld the trial court’s decision. The Full Court noted that Justice Niles correctly applied Civil Procedure Rules (CPR 12.03), finding that Rodrigues failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay and that his proposed defence carried “no real prospect of success”.
The Court of Appeal subsequently sustained those findings, leading Rodrigues to file for special leave with the CCJ on June 8, 2026.
Read the full story from the original publication
