ADMINISTRATIVE

TRIBUNALS &
ENQUIRIES

TOPIC IV

1
Introduction
 Not all adjudicatory functions are performed by
ordinary courts.
 Due to complexity in various administrative and
professional functions, some of these
adjudicatory powers are vested upon tribunals.
 They are mostly part of the Executive arm of the
state-hence regarded as administrative organs.
 This is a departure from Art.107A which vest the
power to adjudicate primarily to Judiciary.

2
Meaning of Tribunals
 A tribunal is;
 An independent adjudicatory body,
 Which is normally set up by statutes
 To deal with certain disputes
 Arising under the particular statute or other
statutes
 This organ shares almost similar features with
ordinary court-but is not court per se.
 It is a quasi-judicial body.
 Such powers must emanate from the statute.
3
Continue
 Examples of tribunals are;
 The Ward Tribunals established under the
Ward Tribunals Act, 1985 Cap 206 R.E 2002
to deal with civil matters;
 The District Land and Housing Tribunals
established under the Courts(Land dispute
settlements) Act, 2002 [Act no.2 of 2002,
 The Fair Competition Tribunal established
under the Fair Competition Act, 2003 (Act no.
8 of 2003).
4
Rationale of Tribunals
 Reasons;
 The ordinary court system proved inadequate to deal
with all the cases brought before it
 A need to have bodies which can take preventive
measures
 A need to have bodies which can enforce departmental
policies
 A need to have institutions which have specialized
jurisdiction
 Cheapness, accessibility and freedom from technicality
 A need to have bodies which can have Flexibility in their
proceedings
5
Distinction between Courts &
Tribunals
Courts Tribunals
 Part of the traditional judicial  Are agencies or statutory
system bodies
 Deals with various issues  Formed for specific issues
 Free from Executive  Part and parcel of the
Influence’ Executive arm
 Have power to control  Have no such powers
legislations  That is not necessary for
 Should be composed of well tribunals unless the law makes
trained personnel in field of it mandatory
law  Tribunals subordinate to courts
 Courts control tribunals
6
Similarities between Courts and
Tribunals
 All derive their legality from various statutory
instruments and the Constitution.
 Both are adjudicatory bodies which deal with
disputes between parties
 On this it was stated in the case of Associated
Cement Co. Ltd V P.N. Sharma AIR 1965 SC 1595
that the basic and the fundamental feature which is
common to both the courts and the tribunals is that
they discharge judicial functions and exercise judicial
powers which inherently vest in a sovereign state.


7
Continue
 Both are governed by the principle of
neutrality and impartiality while deciding the
dispute before them.
 However, in some circumstances
administrative tribunal can be an interested
party to dispute in which it is adjudicating.
 But in all such circumstances, the duty to act
judicially is there for the purpose of ensuring
that justice prevails.

8
Continue
 One thing to be noted is that not all Tribunals are
administrative.
 Professor Wade says that the expression
‘administrative tribunals’ is misleading for various
reasons;
 That every tribunal is a result of an Act of Parliament

and not by Government

than administrative
 That not all tribunals deal with cases in which

Government is a party
 That Tribunals are independent bodies
9
Practice and Procedures
 Tribunals are not strictly bound to follow strict
rules of evidence and procedure.
 They are not required to adhere to technical
and strict rules of evidence.
 Therefore hearsay evidence,
 Admissibility of documents,
 The issues of burden of proof etc
 Can be decided depending on the
circumstances of the dispute and not relying on
the strict rules of evidence.
10
Continue
 In the case of State of Mysore v
Shivabasappa AIR 1963 SC 375 it was stated;
 “Tribunals exercising quasi-judicial functions are not
courts and therefore they are not bound to follow the
procedure prescribed for trial of actions in courts nor
are they bound by strict rules of evidence. They can,
unlike courts, obtain all information material for the
points under enquiry from all sources, and through
all channels, without being fettered by rules and
procedure which govern proceedings in court.

11
Continue
 The only obligation which the law casts on them is
that they should not act on any information which
they may receive unless they put it to the party
against whom it is to be used and give him a fair
opportunity to explain it.
 What is a fair opportunity must depend on the facts
and circumstances of each case but where such an
opportunity had been given, the proceedings are not
open to attack on the ground that the enquiry was
not conducted in accordance with the procedure
followed in courts.”

12
Continue
 When deciding any matter before it,
administrative tribunal is expected to give
reasons for any decision made.
 Giving reasons is considered to one of the
cardinal principles of natural justice.
 This duty was emphasized in the case of M.P.
Industries v Union of India, AIR 1966 SC
671 where it was state that;

13
Continue
 “The condition to give reasons introduces
clarity and excludes or at any rate minimises
arbitrariness; it gives satisfaction to the party
against whom the order is made; and it also
enables an appellate or supervisory court to
keep the tribunals within bounds.
 A reasoned order is a desirable condition of
judicial disposal”

14
Challenging Tribunal’s decision
 The decision of administrative tribunal can be
challenged by the following ways;
 By way of appeal-appeal is a constitutional
right. However, one cannot enforce this right
on the basis of the Constitution. One can
appeal against the decision of the Tribunal if
the law established that Tribunal or that
empowers it adjudicatory functions gives room
for appeal. Right to appeal is not inherent. It
originates from the statute.

15
Continue
 By way of revision-Decisions made by
administrative tribunals can be revised by higher
authorities or ordinary courts of law upon
application from the party which is dissatisfied
with the decision of the particular tribunal.
 The law may grant supervisory power which
gives mandate to the court to call for the records
of proceedings of a particular tribunal and satisfy
itself with the way the decision was reached.
Such revisory power can go to the extent of
reversing the decision which was made.
16
Continue
 By review of its own decision-The Tribunal may, on
application by any party to the dispute or on its own
motion, revisit its own decision and correct any error
made when making such decision. This is what is
termed as review.
 By reference-Sometimes the tribunal on its own
motion and where the law provide for the same may
refer its decision to the Higher authority or ordinary
court of law so that the latter can satisfy itself on the
way proceedings were conducted or seek for the
proper interpretation of the law.
 By Judicial Review-control of Tribunals by High Court
17
Continue
 Judicial review is the power vested to the High
Court.
 Tribunals may be challenges by this way where;
 The statute does not provide for right to appeal,
revision or reference to any higher authority
against the order passed by administrative
tribunal or authority
 The statute expressly provides that the decision
made by the administrative tribunal or authority
is final and conclusive.

18
Continue
 In the case of Tanzania Air Service Ltd v
Minister for Labour and 2others [1996] TLR
217, the Court stated that;
 The provision that the…decision is final and
conclusive does not mean that the decision
cannot be reviewed by the High Court; indeed no
appeal will lie against such a decision but an
aggrieved party may come to the High Court and
ask for prerogative orders.
 ‘Final and Conclusive’ provisions are what
sometimes called “Ouster or Finality Clauses”
19
Continue
 Although some of the Tribunals have been
given power to give decisions which are final
and conclusive, yet such decisions can be
quashed by the court where these tribunals
exceed their jurisdiction.
 If at all individuals would have not given the
opportunity to challenge arbitrariness of some
of the decisions of administrative tribunals,
then the fate of justice would be put into
jeopardy.
20
Continue
 This was pointed out by Lord Denning in R v
Medical Appeal Tribunal [1957] 1 QB 574,
where he stated;
 “If tribunals were at liberty to exceed their
jurisdiction without any check by the courts,
the rule of law would be at an end”
 Factors taken into consideration when
invoking powers of Judicial review are going
to be discussed in the coming topic.

21
Enquiries
 A process of making investigation into a certain
matter in order to assist administrative organ to
make a well-informed decision.
 There two types of Enquiries;
 Statutory Enquiries
 Non-statutory enquiries
 Normally inquiries are held in controversial
cases in order to come up with something
which administrators can use to reach proper
decisions.
22
Continue
 Inquiries normally involve limited issues and cover
a specified geographical area with a limited time.
 The government may establish non-statutory
inquiries to investigate issues considered to be of
public interest and concern. E.g;
 Ihema Commission of Inquiry
 Nyalali Commission of Inquiry;
 The Kipenka’s Commission of Inquiry;
 Kissanga’s Commission of Inquiry;
 Shivji’s Commission of Inquiry, etc

23
The Process of Enquiry
 In the process of inquiry the procedures must
ensure that there is a balance between the rights
of individuals who will be affected by the
outcome of the process and the general interests
of the public.
 Rules of natural justice have to be adhered in
order to ensure a fair decision making at the end.
 However, Enquiries are quite distinct from courts
of law as stated in the case of Bushell v
Secretary of State for the Environment [1981]
AC 75.
24
Continue
 Generally the process of inquiry takes into account;
 Nature of the persons to form the commission of inquiry
 Nature of the issue which the inquiry is formed to
undertake.
 The nature of persons to be examined.
 Mode of collection of information necessary for the
report
 The size of population to be examined
 Geographical area
 How the issue is serious to the public interest
 Cost implications
25
Distinction between Tribunals and
Inquiries
Tribunals Enquiries
 Facts finder and makes  Facts finder but only
decisions makes recommendations
 Status of decisions-  Findings-mere
Binding recommendations
 Must be formed by  Not necessarily creatures
statutes of statutes
 Permanent in nature  Mostly, temporary in
dealing with specific nature and formed for
purposes specific purposes

26
Similarities between Tribunals and
Enquiries
 These include;
 Both can be subjected to supervisory powers of
the ordinary courts of law.
 The proceedings of both can be subject of judicial
review by the High Court.
 Both have duty to act in fairness and within their
powers
 The composition of both does not necessarily
require persons who are lawyers
 They are both not bound by strict rules of evidence
and procedures
27
THE END

28