By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

I conceded that as wrong in view of the two decisions of the Tanzania Court ofAppoal in Patman garments Industries Ltd, Vrs Tanzania Manufacturers Ltd:(1981) T.L.R. 303 and D.R. Kaijage vrs, Esso Standard Tanzania Ltd: CivilAppeal No. 10 of 1982.In fact those two decisions have been confirmed by the full court of the TanzaniaCourt of Appeal in the case of Esso Standard Tanzania Ltd. D.R. Kaijage: Civilappeal No. 6 of 1989 whose decision was delivered on 2/8/1990. In Kaijage CaseCivil Appeal No. 10 of 1982, Makone J.A. p.2 of the suit would proceed to trial:and indeed I hoard the suit.However I commenced the trial reluctantly and may program on the courts. It hascreated a new general substitute of judicial review for the normal procedure ofjudicial control of administrative action by means other than prerogrative orders.The decision expands judicial review to encompass ordinary civil suits instead ofbeing confined to prerogative orders of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus,.The consequences are monstrous. First, since an ordinary civil suit is sanctioned,you don’t have to sue the official whose decision is impugned, as is the case inhere end as was the case in Patman’s case (supra), in Kaijage case (supra) andin Mahona vrs, Unviversty of DSM: (1981) T.L.R. 55. The official who decided theimpugned administrative act is not made respondent, but his decision isnevertheless challenged in a collateral suit. In patman’s case (spurn) the saidproblem was referred to, however Mwakasendo J.A brushed it aside by stating atp.310 that if th defendant wanted the public official concerned to defend his617