PVL3703 - ASSIGNMENT 02 - 2023
SEMESTER 01
Cable thieves have been busy with attempts to steal electrical cables
overnight on the outskirts of Tshwane. As a result of their illegal activities, a
live electrical cable is hanging low over a public road. While driving towards
his workplace, Mr Ngwenya, who lives on a smallholding outside Tshwane,
sees the low- hanging cable. As a concerned and responsible citizen, Mr
Ngwenya immediately reports it to ESKOM, explaining to the ESKOM officials
that the low- hanging cable is creating an extremely hazardous situation.
However, ESKOM does nothing to eliminate the danger. Late that afternoon,
Mr Naidoo, a physically fit man, but with poor eyesight, jogs along the road.
His head hits the low-hanging electrical cable, and he sustains severe injuries.
Mr Naidoo wishes to institute a delictual action against ESKOM.
Write an opinion, properly substantiated with reference to case law, only on the
wrongfulness of the conduct of the ESKOM officials (15 Marks).
Illegalness is the violation of a protected right in a legally reprehensible manner / in
violation of a legal norm. The main norm/criterion of illegality is the good morals/legal
beliefs of the community. The test is objective, based on adequacy, and must reflect
the values of the Constitution. (Carmichele case). Community law convictions should
be seen as legal convictions of policy makers in Community law, such as the
legislature or Justices Schultz v. Butt. First, it must be determined whether the
respondent's action was in fact the cause of an adverse effect on another person.
Second, it must be determined whether the damage was caused unreasonably or
illegally.
Since this was a similar case to the previous situation in A. F. A. vs BLUE CRANE
ROUTE MUNICIPALITY1 In paragraph [4] it was decided that in cases where the
defendant is a "licensee" within the meaning of the Electricity Regulation Act 4 of
2006, it is not at issue: he is therefore "the holder". a license granted or deemed to
have been granted by the Regulator under this Act.”1 Section 25 of the Act provides:
“In any civil proceeding brought against a licensee arising out of damage caused by
induction or electrolysis or otherwise by electricity generated , transmitted, or
disseminated by a Licensee, such damage or loss shall be deemed to be caused by
the negligence of Licensee unless there is credible evidence to the contrary.
SEMESTER 01
Cable thieves have been busy with attempts to steal electrical cables
overnight on the outskirts of Tshwane. As a result of their illegal activities, a
live electrical cable is hanging low over a public road. While driving towards
his workplace, Mr Ngwenya, who lives on a smallholding outside Tshwane,
sees the low- hanging cable. As a concerned and responsible citizen, Mr
Ngwenya immediately reports it to ESKOM, explaining to the ESKOM officials
that the low- hanging cable is creating an extremely hazardous situation.
However, ESKOM does nothing to eliminate the danger. Late that afternoon,
Mr Naidoo, a physically fit man, but with poor eyesight, jogs along the road.
His head hits the low-hanging electrical cable, and he sustains severe injuries.
Mr Naidoo wishes to institute a delictual action against ESKOM.
Write an opinion, properly substantiated with reference to case law, only on the
wrongfulness of the conduct of the ESKOM officials (15 Marks).
Illegalness is the violation of a protected right in a legally reprehensible manner / in
violation of a legal norm. The main norm/criterion of illegality is the good morals/legal
beliefs of the community. The test is objective, based on adequacy, and must reflect
the values of the Constitution. (Carmichele case). Community law convictions should
be seen as legal convictions of policy makers in Community law, such as the
legislature or Justices Schultz v. Butt. First, it must be determined whether the
respondent's action was in fact the cause of an adverse effect on another person.
Second, it must be determined whether the damage was caused unreasonably or
illegally.
Since this was a similar case to the previous situation in A. F. A. vs BLUE CRANE
ROUTE MUNICIPALITY1 In paragraph [4] it was decided that in cases where the
defendant is a "licensee" within the meaning of the Electricity Regulation Act 4 of
2006, it is not at issue: he is therefore "the holder". a license granted or deemed to
have been granted by the Regulator under this Act.”1 Section 25 of the Act provides:
“In any civil proceeding brought against a licensee arising out of damage caused by
induction or electrolysis or otherwise by electricity generated , transmitted, or
disseminated by a Licensee, such damage or loss shall be deemed to be caused by
the negligence of Licensee unless there is credible evidence to the contrary.
