The ongoing dispute between Blue Chip Hospitality Limited (BCH) and The Secret Garden Limited (TSG) highlights the challenges faced by tenants seeking protection under the Rent Act, 1963 (Act 220), in the face of actions by an oppressive landlord. BCH, with TSG's full knowledge, invested significantly in the property in question for its restaurant, East End Bistro. Despite a clear agreement allowing BCH to sublet the property until 2028, TSG unilaterally sought to terminate the tenancy and evict BCH without any compensation. BCH, invoking its rights under the Rent Act, claimed statutory tenancy, which allows a tenant to remain in possession by paying rent monthly unless evicted by the court. TSG, unable to cope with the monthly rent payments due to its own annual advance rent arrangement with its landlord, initiated legal action to evict BCH. In response, BCH counterclaimed, asking the court to affirm its statutory tenancy rights. TSG also requested an order to bar BCH from transferring the property while the suit was pending. The court granted this order not because BCH had transferred its interest, but due to TSG's unfounded fears that BCH might do so. TSG accused BCH of contempt of court after seeing the La Maison logo on the property, interpreting it as a transfer of interest. However, BCH had permission to use the La Maison brand for its restaurant, similar to franchises using brands like KFC or Burger King. This accusation reflects a misunderstanding of commercial practices in the hospitality sector. Moreover, TSG's lawyer admitted in court that BCH remained in possession but accused BCH of wanting to stay without paying rent, contradicting TSG's own case. The court was led to believe that BCH's directors were within the jurisdiction but refused to attend court, leading to an arrest warrant. However, evidence shows that the directors were out of the country before the contempt hearing. This deceit was intended to create negative publicity against BCH before the court could consider the merits of the case. The arrest warrant was issued based on the false belief that the directors were in Ghana but refused to attend court. It is important to note that, according to the Courts Act, 1993 (Act 459) and several decisions of the Superior Courts of Ghana, the court's criminal jurisdiction, including issuing warrants, is territorial and does not extend to individuals outside its jurisdiction. Blue Chip Hospitality Limited (BCH) and its directors have brought TSG's misleading conduct to the court's attention. The court will address these matters on 13th August 2024. BCH and its directors will not be bullied by the short-lived tactics of TSG, designed to damage the image and reputation of BCH and strongarm BCH into settling. BCH and its directors will continue to defend themselves and will soon take appropriate legal action against those involved in this attempt to tarnish their reputation.