Part 2: High Court Civil Case No. 46 of 2015
Crafty efforts employed by Jennings to scuttle the suit
The following are recorded FACTUAL events on how STEPHEN Jennings has been using crafty efforts and means to scuttle the suit case no. 46 at high court of Kenya. These events can be collaborated by real time evidence and interview exclusively done by The KENYAN HERALD. We wish to inform all media across the world that you can reuse this material and any reference should be made to the editor at Kenyanherald.com through email email@example.com.
Jennings, according to our investigations, is a known business tyrant abroad, what the business fraternity in Kenya is not aware of. We have over time documented his business dealings both abroad and in the country. Today we document yet again events that we at Kenyan Herald editorial board consider crafty. Mr Jennings has continued to buy and bribe his way up and through the weak Kenyan investigative and judiciary bodies.
For many who are not privy to the ongoings at TATU CITY, they may even consider sympathizing with STEPHEN JENNINGS who has as well projected an image of an exploited foreign businessman. But the contrary is scary. STEPHEN JENNINGS in essence has exploited in all manner the KENYAN partners at TATU CITY and the TRUTH has been vague and hidden from the public in the longest time due to his capability of bribing and influencing his way through.
- On 6th March 2015, the Court dismissed Jennings and his associates’ application which sought for the striking out of the suit filed by Tatu City and Kofinaf as Plaintiffs on the claim that the same was not authorized by the said companies’ majority in the Board of Directors. The Court further directed that an in-depth audit of the loan accounts be undertaken by PwC. Further Orders in respect of the in-depth audit were made on 28th April, 2015 and 12th June, 2015.
- All the above three Court Orders clearly spelt out that the in-depth audit of the loan account be undertaken and a report filed in Court within 45 days, however, the Jennings team frustrated the efforts to commence the audit:-
- They asked PwC not to go on with the in-depth audit on the false claim that there was a dispute on instructions while it was clear that the chairman of the board had the requisite mandate to instruct the said auditor to commence the exercise;
- They attempted to coerce Kofinaf’s former Company Secretary, whom they had fired upon the Company instituting the suit, to falsify minutes of the Board of Directors meeting.
- They falsified an extract of the minutes in respect to the audit issue attempting to reduce the scope of the in-depth audit. The Jennings team unilaterally appointed Coulson and Harney Advocates to provide a new Company Secretary to the board;
- The newly unilaterally appointed Company Secretary, altered and falsified the minutes of the Board Meeting of Kofinaf and varied the contents thereof in so far as they relate to the loan audit;
- They called further board meetings to: remove the Chairman of the Board as one of the persons designated to liaise with PwC in the audit; and, ratify the unlawful alterations to the minutes of the board meeting that had unanimously approved for an in-depth audit, alter Kofinaf’s memarts to further their intended unilateral control of the Companies.
- On 16th September 2015, Jennings held a board meeting of the so-called `majority shareholders’, deliberated and resolved that no in-depth audit shall be undertaken by PwC or at the request of the Plaintiffs in any event contrary to the Court Orders;
- On 17th September 2015, Jennings stated in a widely publicized public address at the Museum of Kenya auditorium that he would not in any circumstance allow any in-depth audit to be undertaken by PwC or at the request of Nyagah and Vimal in any event, contrary to the Court Orders; and,
- They have intimidated PwC in the media and directly. On that account, PwC has abandoned undertaking the exercise. Jennings has now unilaterally appointed an audit firm of his choice, with a reduced scope, to purportedly undertake the said in-depth audit.
- Upon hitting a legal brick wall in court, Jennings team changed strategy and adopted a new strategy to demean the judicial process. They now opted to prosecute their case in their own words “in the court of public opinion’’. The constant bad press and personal vendetta against the Kenyan investors fits in this unfortunate strategy. You will recall the personal attacks by Jennings at the MindSpeak and at the Museum of Kenya fora and the proliferation of obscene personal attacks in the social media which culminated in both Vimal and Nyagah suing Jennings for defamation. Notwithstanding that the Court granted Orders stopping Jennings to stop making these unsubstantiated defamatory attacks, todate Jennings has not seized to do so and, indeed, seems to have adopted the Kenyan notoriety of `mta do!’. He has now hired a dedicated army to continue the attacks in the social media. Kenya Herald has reported in its past articles on Tatu City how the mainstream media has been compromised in reporting about the deplorable and sad state of affairs at Tatu City.
- To further divert the attention from the judicial process, Jennings sued Nyagah and another 20 Kenyan investors who have lawfully bought land from Kofinaf. Once the said parties demonstrated their innocence in their pleadings it became clear to Jennings that he was fighting a battle in futility. Once again, tactics changed! A criminal complaint was filed with the directorate of CID. When that was not going their way, Jennings in unsubstantiated claim accused Nyagah of having bribed the Director of CID to seek protection. Another time, Nyagah was supposed to have compromised the Judge handling this suit with an alleged award of a Shs.100 million cash deal. That too was not substantiated! For Vimal, the personalized attack has been in the alternative press. BidcoAfrica which is not even a shareholder in Tatu City or Kofinaf has received undeserved attacks showing the unprofessional manner in which Jennings has fought his battles.
- In the meantime, the firm of Advocates that was representing Jennings and his team of Defendants, TripleOkLaw, was dropped and replaced with Ahmednasir to facilitate what now looks to be a more aggressive and daring strategy. All the Defendants have now split their legal representation with each assigned to drive a solo process, which to informed observers looks like a dare devil kamikaze style.
In disobedience and in contempt of previous Court Orders, Jennings and his associates held a board meeting on 16th September 2015, deliberated and resolved that: the suit filed by the companies was not authorized by the majority of directors; Havi & Company Advocates (“Havi’’) who filed it was not instructed to act and should be replaced by an Advocate of their choice, Mr. Ahmednasir Abdullahi practicing in the name and style of Ahmednasir Abdikadir & Company Advocates (“Ahmednasir’’); and further, Jennings and his team deliberated and resolved that Nyagah and Vimal should show cause within 7 days, why they filed the suit against the Jennings team, failing which they would be voted out as directors for breach of trust and misconduct