IN THE HIGH COURT FOR ZAMBIA 2015/HP/……..

AT THE PRINCIPAL REGISTRY

HOLDEN AT LUSAKA
(Civil Jurisdiction)

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUCICIAL

REVIEW

AND
IN THE MATTER OF ORDER 53 RULE 3 OF THE RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT
BETWEEN:
TIISEZA ZAMBIA LIMITED APPLICANT
AND
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RESPONDENT

EX-PARTE SUMMONS FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

LET THE PARTY Concerned attend before the Honourable Mr/Madam Justice………………..
in Chambers on the ………………..day of…………………2015 at ……………….. hours in the
………………………..noon as Counsel may be heard for an Order that the Applicant be granted
leave to apply for Judicial Review for reliefs stated in the Notice of Application for Leavel filed
herewith and that costs incidental thereto be in the cause.

Dated at Lusaka this day of 2015

M.L. Mukande & Company

Plot No. 1285, Cnr/Lungwebungu &
Mambulima Roads
Rhodes Park
P.O. Box 30134
LUSAKA
ADVOCATES FOR THE PLAINTIFF
TO: The Attorney General
Ministry of Justice
Fairly Road
LUSAKA
ADVOCATES FOR THE DEFENDANT
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR ZAMBIA 2015/HP/……..
AT THE PRINCIPAL REGISTRY
HOLDEN AT LUSAKA
(Civil Jurisdiction)

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUCICIAL

REVIEW

AND
IN THE MATTER OF ORDER 53 RULE 3 OF THE RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT
BETWEEN:
TIISEZA ZAMBIA LIMITED APPLICANT
AND
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RESPONDENT

EX-PARTE SUMMONS FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

M.L. Mukande & Company

Plot No. 1285, Cnr/Lungwebungu &
Mambulima Roads
Rhodes Park
P.O. Box 30134
LUSAKA
ADVOCATES FOR THE PLAINTIFF
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR ZAMBIA 2015/HP/……..
AT THE PRINCIPAL REGISTRY
HOLDEN AT LUSAKA
(Civil Jurisdiction)

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUCICIAL

REVIEW

AND
IN THE MATTER OF ORDER 53 RULE 3 OF THE RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT
BETWEEN:
TIISEZA ZAMBIA LIMITED APPLICANT
AND
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RESPONDENT

NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

-Pursuant to Order 53 Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules

TO: The Assistant Deputy Registrar, High Court for Zambia, Independence Avenue, Lusaka.

NAME, ADDRESS & DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICANT

TIISEZA ZAMBIA LIMITED of Post Net Box 193, Private Bag E835, Kabulonga, Lusaka,
Zambia.

ACTION IN RESPECT OF WHICH RELIEF IS SOUGHT

The action of the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Mines, Energy and Water Development
refusing to communicate the outcome of the Applicant’s bid.

RELIEF SOUGHT:
Judicial review in the form of:

1. An Order of Mandamus compelling the Respondent to disclose the outcome of the

Applicant’s bid.

2. An Order for damages.

3. An Order for Costs.

GROUNDS UPON WHICH RELIEF IS SOUGHT

FACTS

1. Sometime in May/June, 2013 the Government of the Republic of Zambia through the
Ministry of Mines, Energy and Water Development and pursuant to section 9 of the
Petroleum (Exploration and Production) Act No. 10 of 2008 invited sealed bids for
Petroleum (Oil and Gas) Exploration Licences in thirty- one (31) blocks Luapula,
Northern, North- Western, Western, Eastern and Southern Provinces of Zambia from
eligible bidders.

2. Eligible bidders satisfying Section 7 of the Petroleum (Exploration and Production) Act
No. 10 of 2008 were required to submit:-

a) Full information regarding the bidder’s financial status, technical competency and
experience;
b) The code number of the exploration block in respect of which the bid is being
made;
c) The proposed programme of exploration operations and the estimated cost;
d) The bidder’s proposals for the promotion of local business development;
e) An environment commitment plan; and
f) An environmental commitment plan; and
 g) Plans for corporate social responsibility which include infrastructure
development.
Pursuant to the conditions set out at page 4 of the bid document.

3. The bidding documents were available to all interested eligible bidders upon the payment
of a non-refundable fee of US$10,000.00 or Zambian Rebased Kwacha equivalent or
Bank Certified Cheque.

4. The data package consisting of data on geology, geophysics and petroleum were
available to all interested upon payment of US$20,000.00 or Zambian Rebased Kwacha
equivalent in cash or Bank Certified Cheque.

5. Pursuant to the terms of the bidding documents and being interested in the tender the
Applicant purchased the bidding documents and the data package aforesaid.

6. The Applicant’s sealed bid document was delivered to the Permanent Secretary by Mr
Ngenda Situmbeko at the Ministry of Mines, Energy and Water Development, 12 th Floor,
New Government Complex, Nasser Road on June 28th, 2013.

7. It was a term of the tender in the bid document that bids shall remain valid until a
successful bidder is selected and announced after the deadline.

8. The closing date for the bids was 28 th June, 2013 and to date the Applicant have not been
informed of the outcome of their bid.

9. Information in the media has indicated that selection of successful bidders has been done
and some bidders have been informed.

10. On 26th December, 2013 the Applicant sought information from the relevant Permanent
Secretary on the outcome of their bid.

11. To date the Applicant has had no information on the fate of their bid.
 12. The silence of the Respondents prejudices the Applicant’s position as they are kept in
suspense and uncertainty.

13. The behavior of the Respondents is discriminatory in that other bidders have been
informed.

14. Given the money, time and diligence expended on the bids the Appellants are entitled to
be informed of the fate of their bid.

15. By matters aforesaid and pursuant to the terms of the tender the Respondents have a duty
to release the result of the tender to all those all participated.

THE LAW
Procedural impropriety/ illegality
1.1 It is contended that the action of the Permanent Secretary – Ministry of Mines, Energy
and Water Development is maligned by procedural impropriety. Section 53 (1) of the
Public Procurement Act provides that “a procuring entity shall, within seven days of
awarding a contract, prepare a notice indicating the best evaluated bidder and the value of
the proposed contract, and send the notice to all bidders who submitted bids.” The
Respondents have a duty to release the result of the tender to all those who participated.

1.2 The Applicant will rely on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Derrick
ChitalaV. The Attorney General 1995/1997 ZR 91 where the Supreme Court, approving
the speech by Lord Diplock in the case of Civil Service Union V. Ministry for the Civil
Service [1985] AC. 374 that susceptibility to Judicial Review on the ground of procedural
impropriety covers also failure by an administrative tribunal to observe procedural rules
that are expressly laid down in the legislative instrument by which its jurisdiction is
conferred, even where such failure does not involve any denial of natural justice.

Dated at Lusaka this day of 2015

 M.L. Mukande & Company
Plot No. 1285, Cnr/Lungwebungu &
Mambulima Roads
Rhodes Park
P.O. Box 30134
LUSAKA

ADVOCATES FOR THE PLAINTIFF

TO: The Attorney General

Ministry of Justice
Fairly Road
LUSAKA
ADVOCATES FOR THE RESPONDENTS