Hendrik Johannes Pitzer v Eskom

The appellant, a qualified electrician, was injured by an electric shock on 14 July 2006 inside a live chamber of an electrical substation operated by Eskom in Vanderbijlpark. Access to the high-voltage yard and live chambers was strictly regulated and under the supervision of an Eskom official, Mr Fourie. On the day in question, Fourie left the premises and the main gate to the high-voltage yard and the door to the live chamber were left open. The appellant entered the yard to check whether painters had vacated and, believing the live chamber to be decommissioned due to its open state and other surrounding circumstances, entered it. He was electrocuted by live equipment and suffered injuries. He sued Eskom for damages, alleging negligence. The High Court dismissed the claim, finding the appellant solely negligent and that he had voluntarily assumed the risk.

The appeal succeeded with costs. The High Court’s order was set aside and replaced with an order declaring Eskom liable for 50% of the appellant’s proven or agreed damages.

The case is significant for its application of the statutory presumption of negligence under section 26 of the Electricity Act and its clarification that operators of high-voltage installations must foresee harm even to trained professionals. It reinforces Eskom’s strict duties as an undertaker and illustrates the approach to contributory negligence in delictual claims involving dangerous activities.