Eskom Holdings Soc Ltd v Sidoyi and Others

Eskom implemented a programme in July 2017 to disconnect and remove allegedly illegal and dangerous electricity installations in the Zwelitsha area. The respondents, including Mr Sidoyi, owned properties that were disconnected. Mr Sidoyi claimed that electricity had been installed at his property in 2015 by a contractor who assured him of Eskom authorisation, that a prepaid meter was in place, and that he had been purchasing electricity from Eskom since then. Eskom contended that the installations were unlawful, dangerous, not authorised, and lacked certificates of compliance, and that it was obliged under the Electrical Installations Regulations to disconnect them. The respondents sought restoration of electricity supply, alleging unlawful administrative action.

The appeal succeeded. The High Court’s order was set aside and replaced with an order referring the application to the hearing of oral evidence on whether the electricity installations were lawfully installed, with costs reserved.

The case clarifies that disputes over the lawfulness of electricity connections must be resolved before courts can grant relief restoring supply. It distinguishes lawful from unlawful electricity supply in the context of administrative law and limits the application of PAJA where no underlying right exists. It also reinforces the proper use of motion proceedings and referrals to oral evidence in the presence of material disputes of fact.