Viktar Maina Ngunjiri v Jack & Jill Supermarkets Ltd [2018] KECA 179 (KLR)

Facts

The respondent, Jack & Jill Supermarkets Ltd, was a tenant in the suit premises for over 20 years. Viktar Maina Ngunjiri, the appellant, purchased the premises in 2006 and became the landlord. The appellant served a notice to terminate the tenancy, which the respondent contested. The appellant then colluded with the City Council to serve notices requiring repairs or alterations, leading to a criminal case against the appellant. The respondent initiated a judicial review application, which resulted in an order staying the notices and the magistrates' orders.

Issues

1. Whether the appellant had complied with a court order restraining him from demolishing the suit premises.
2. Whether the appellant had disobeyed the court order by gradually demolishing the premises.

Reasoning

The court held that the appellant had not complied with the court order and had disobeyed it by gradually demolishing the premises. The standard of proof in contempt proceedings is higher than proof on a balance of probabilities but not as high as proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

Authorities cited