Electricity Networks Corporation v Herridge Parties [2022] HCA 37

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KIEFEL CJ,

GAGELER, GORDON, EDELMAN AND STEWARD JJ

ELECTRICITY NETWORKS CORPORATION

T/AS WESTERN POWER APPELLANT

AND

HERRIDGE PARTIES & ORS RESPONDENTS

Electricity Networks Corporation v Herridge Parties

[2022] HCA 37

Date of Hearing: 6, 7 & 8 September 2022

Date of Judgment: 7 December 2022

P5/2022

ORDER

1. Application for special leave to cross-appeal filed by the First Respondents with respect to grounds 2 and 3 of the proposed grounds of cross-appeal refused with costs.

2. Application for special leave to cross-appeal filed by the Second Respondents refused with costs.

3. Appeal dismissed.

4. The Appellant pay the costs of the First, Second, Fourth and Fifth Respondents in this Court.

On appeal from the Supreme Court of Western Australia

Representation

B Dharmananda SC with M J Sims and B K Lim for the appellant (instructed by DLA Piper Australia)

P J Dunning QC with T C Smyth for the first respondents (instructed by Slater & Gordon Lawyers)

C M Harris QC with P Mendelow for the second respondents (instructed by Hall & Wilcox)

Submitting appearance for the third respondents

J C Giles SC with E Bathurst for the fourth respondent (instructed by MinterEllison)

J T Gleeson SC with K I H Lindeman for the fifth respondent (instructed by Wotton + Kearney)

Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.

CATCHWORDS

Electricity Networks Corporation v Herridge Parties

Negligence – Duty of care – Where appellant statutory corporation ("Western Power") undertook, operated, managed and maintained electricity distribution system under interconnected statutory framework – Where distribution system delivered electricity to consumers' premises – Where pursuant to statutory powers in performing statutory functions Western Power attached electrical cable and other apparatus to point of attachment pole ("PA pole") owned by and on land of fourth respondent ("Mrs Campbell") and energised her premises – Where Western Power contracted fifth respondent ("Thiess") to undertake works in vicinity of Mrs Campbell's property – Where works included removing and replacing electrical cable attached to PA pole – Where employee of Thiess did not adequately undertake inspection of PA pole to identify signs of deterioration in accordance with industry standards – Where PA pole fell to ground causing bushfire – Whether Western Power owed to persons in vicinity of distribution system duty to take reasonable care to avoid or minimise risk of injury to those persons, and loss or damage to their property, from ignition and spread of fire in connection with delivery of electricity through distribution system.