The claimants alleged that they had suffered loss as a result of the defendants’ breach of regulation 25(1) of the 1988 Regulations.
Held: The statutory power of an electricity supplier, to exclude by contract his own liability for consequential losses, arising from a failure in supply, was restricted to losses flowing from power interruptions, and did not extend to losses arising from its negligence in installing equipment. The section was ambiguous, and Pepper v Hart was properly used to seek support. Parliamentary debates were quite clear as to the purpose of the section.
Judges:
May LJ, Laws LJ, Lord Phillips MR
Citations:
Times 10-Jan-2001, Gazette 01-Feb-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 312, [2001] 1 WLR 281
Links:
Statutes:
Electricity Act 1989 21, Electricity Supply Regulations 1988 (SI 1988 no 1057) 25(1)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – A E Beckett and Sons (Lyndons) Ltd and Others v Midlands Electricity Plc QBD 2000
The claimants alleged that they had suffered loss as a result of the defendants’ breach of regulation 25(1) of the 1988 Regulations. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Morrison Sports Ltd and Others v Scottish Power SC 28-Jul-2010
A fire caused substantial damage to buildings. It arose from a ‘shim’ placed in a fuse box which then overheated. The parties disputed whose employee had inserted the shim. The Act under which the Regulations had been made was repealed and replaced . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other, Consumer, Utilities
Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.77575
