The applicants in this case sought for an interim order order to restrain the Respondents, the Dar es Salaam City commission and Ilala Municipal Commission, from, inter alia, dumping solid and liquid wastes in a particular area because of pollution of the areas environment as well as endangering the health and lives of the applicants. Furthermore, they sought an interim order restraining the Respondents from using the abattoir located in the area for slaughtering of animals due to total disrepair as well as due to its vicinity to the dumping site and the use of polluted water from a water hole dug near the dumping site.
The respondents challenged the locus standi of the applicants. They contended that the matter before the court was a public right because the applicants were alleging public nuisance. Where public rights were at issue individuals had no right to represent individuals hence the applicants as individuals would have no locus standi in the matter before the court without the consent of the Attorney General. The applicants could be allowed to circumvent the law to enforce a public right and that the application was an attempt to fetter the statutory powers of the Attorney General.
The court analyzed the question of locus standi and concluded that the applicants did have standing. It based its decision on the Civil Procedure Code as well as the doctrine of public interest litigation enshrined in the Constitution. The applicants who were claiming to be affected by the action of the respondents in the dumping of liquid and solid wastes as well as failure to provide a healthy and clean environment certainly also had a cause of action against the respondent. Applicants could be heard on the matters raised in their depositing in asserting both a public right and or special damage likely to be suffered over and beyond the general public. In conclusion the court decided that the matter was properly before the court for trial of the issues presented.
Regarding the prayers for temporary injunction the court decided to defer making a decision on the prayers until the final determination of the suit was filed. The applicants had made similar assertions both in the affidavit and the plaint, assertions which needed to be verified at the trial.