The Court of First Instance has ruled that landlords cannot terminate the 17-year lease of the apartment at Fan Coral Road 17-2, overturning a previous Rent Committee decision.
~ Judge rules landlords acted unlawfully in cutting utilities ~
PHILIPSBURG--The Court of First Instance has overturned a Rent Committee decision that had authorised the eviction of attorney Eric Jansen from his Beacon Hill apartment. Landlords Dr. Hidde Pieter Deketh and Sharon Deketh-Banfield failed to provide sufficient legal grounds for termination and acted unlawfully in cutting off essential utilities.
In a judgment issued on Monday, October 27, the Court annulled the earlier Rent Committee ruling (HC-1463) that had allowed the landlords to terminate the 17-year lease of the apartment at Fan Coral Road 17-2 by August 31, 2025.
The case was filed by BZSE Attorneys at Law, which holds the lease, alongside Jansen, who has occupied the apartment since 2008. The landlords had cited rent arrears, disruptive behaviour, and their alleged intention to renovate the property and move in themselves as reasons for eviction. The apartment in question is one of three units the Dekeths own in the same building, a fact the Court considered when evaluating claims of “own use.”
In their appeal, BZSE and Jansen denied any valid basis for eviction. They argued that the alleged arrears stemmed from repair costs Jansen had covered personally after repeated maintenance complaints went unanswered. They also disputed the landlords’ claim that they intended to occupy the apartment, noting it lacked supporting evidence and credibility.
Jansen, who has lived in the apartment for 17 years, highlighted his deep Beacon Hill community ties and fragile health, stressing that eviction would impose serious medical and personal hardship. The Court noted that the ongoing eviction proceedings and the disconnection of utilities have severely impacted Jansen, who is gravely ill, making his current situation especially untenable.
Rejection of claims
The Court ruled that the landlords’ request to terminate the lease was “insufficiently substantiated,” and that the Rent Committee had failed to properly balance the interests of both parties.
“It is unclear when or why the landlords plan to move into this specific apartment, or what renovations would be necessary,” the Court wrote. “The tenant’s long-term residence and personal circumstances outweigh the landlords’ stated intentions.”
Dispute over rent
The landlords alleged that Jansen owed US $2,350, roughly equivalent to one month’s rent. The Court found this insufficient to justify eviction, particularly since BZSE had offered to pay the amount if the Court ruled that no deduction for repair costs was warranted.
The ruling also addressed complications surrounding GEBE utility payments, which were made under the landlords’ account. Following the 2022 cyberattack on GEBE, irregularities caused confusion about outstanding balances. Despite occasional delays, the Court found that Jansen continued making payments and ultimately settled all arrears.
No water and electricity
A major issue in the case was the landlords’ decision to disconnect Jansen’s water and electricity while the matter was still under review by the Rent Committee. Court documents show that the tenant was left without utilities for an extended period, a measure the Court described as “disproportionate and unlawful.”
The judgment emphasised that property owners may not take unilateral action to cut off essential services outside of legal procedures. “The unilateral cutting of essential utilities infringes upon the tenant’s right to peaceful enjoyment of the property,” the Court stated.
Despite the ruling in his favour, Jansen remains without water and electricity. He has been unable to return to his apartment, instead sleeping on a friend’s couch – a circumstance the landlords attempted to use as evidence that he had abandoned the property, an argument the Court rejected.
Jansen is scheduled to travel off island for medical treatment and has expressed hope that on his return, he will be able to return to his home of 17 years and recover in peace. The Court highlighted that the disruption caused by the landlords’ actions has placed Jansen, who is gravely ill, in an especially vulnerable and distressing position.
No proof of nuisance
The Court also dismissed allegations that Jansen had caused disturbances or acted aggressively toward the landlords. “While the relationship between the parties has clearly deteriorated, that alone is not a lawful reason for termination,” the Court stated.
No formal warnings or written complaints had been issued prior to the eviction request, the ruling noted.
Legal costs
The landlords’ eviction request was denied, and they were ordered to pay Cg. 2,950 in legal costs, plus interest. The verdict is immediately enforceable, preventing eviction while any appeal is pending.
While the ruling secures Jansen’s legal right to remain in his apartment, enforcement regarding utilities remains unresolved.
