By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

A part from the applicants obligation to make a full and frank disclosureof all material facts on which they rely, I accept Mr. Werema’s submission thatuberrima fides, that is the almost good faith, is required. It is, in fact, a mandatoryrequirement. This position of the law as is applicable in England was made clearas long ago as in the case of R.v. Kansington Income Tax Commissioners, exparte Princess Edmond (1917) IKB 486, But, as pointed out by the learnedauthored of Judicial Review of Administrative Action by S.A De Smith, 2 ndEdition which is the only edition I could lay hands on from our Library, at page439:-“..Uberrima fides is required and leave will not be granted if there has been adeliberate misrepresentation or concealment of material facts in the applicant’saffidavits.I have perused the applicants affidavit with due care. I am satisfied thataffidavit does not show that there is deliberate misrepresentation or concealmentof facts. All that there is in the counted affidavit that tends to indicate that such asituation exists are contentious matters.There is for distance the claim that some of the applicants were compensated in1972; or that yet others have no property within the disputed lands. To me theseare matters that require proof by concrete evidence. I find no evidence in thecounter affidavit that proves these allegations.I am satisfied, therefore, and I find as a fact that the first applicant’s affidavitmeets the requirement o uberrima fides. It is in this vein that I uphold Prof.Fimbo’s submission on this point.If not considered carefully a decision on the various paragraphs of the firstpoint of objection will pre-empt an application for the prerogative orders if suchan application will be filed. Matters that are raised in paragraphs (b) (c) and (d) inthe first objection will have their legistmate place in that other application. By andlarger therefore, the first objection would fail.The second preliminary objection relates to the locus standi of theapplicants. Mr.Werema has argued in this connection that the affidavit of JosiahBalthazar Baisi does not disclose that all the numerous applicants have a right toappear and to be heard in these proceedings, namely that they have no locusstandi. Professor Fimbo has traced the law relating to how the Morogoro Roadbecame a highway and how his clients as owners or reputed owners or peoplebeing in actual possession of land are entitled to compensation before such land isappropriated by the Government. So, to him, his clients have locus standi .I think it is important to make a distinction between locus standi as regardsclaims of an individual nature for a private law remedy and claims the purpose ofwhich is to get a relief or remedy for the public good which is based on public235