Yorkshire Electricity Distribution Plc v Telewest Ltd

Yorkshire Electricity Distribution Plc v Telewest Ltd

YEDL is strictly liable for damage to Telewest’s ducting during street works unless it can establish that the damage was attributable to negligence or misconduct by Telewest, such as laying ducting in breach of NJUG7 guidance without good reason. Failure to give notice under section 69 does not, by itself, amount to misconduct. Physical damage, not mere movement, is compensable under section 82. In the five cases, the judge’s findings of fact were dispositive, and no error of law or fact was established to disturb them.

Parties
Appellant: Yorkshire Electricity Distribution plc; Respondent: Telewest Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Queen’s Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Street Works, Strict Liability, Negligence, Misconduct, Statutory Interpretation, Industry Standards
Statutory Compensation Utilities Law Tort Law Street Works Strict Liability Negligence Misconduct Statutory Interpretation +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yorkshire Electricity Distribution plc

Appellant

Telewest Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Queen’s Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 82 of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 imposes strict liability for damage to apparatus during street works
  2. 2 Whether failure to give notice under section 69 constitutes misconduct or negligence under section 82(4)
  3. 3 Whether departure from NJUG7 guidance amounts to negligence or misconduct

Ratio Decidendi

YEDL is strictly liable for damage to Telewest’s ducting during street works unless it can establish that the damage was attributable to negligence or misconduct by Telewest, such as laying ducting in breach of NJUG7 guidance without good reason. Failure to give notice under section 69 does not, by itself, amount to misconduct. Physical damage, not mere movement, is compensable under section 82. In the five cases, the judge’s findings of fact were dispositive, and no error of law or fact was established to disturb them.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • All five appeals are dismissed.
  • Parties are encouraged to adopt a protocol for notification and dispute resolution as outlined in the judgment.