Eskom Holdings Limited v Grundy (AR380/2017)
Eskom Holdings Limited v Grundy (AR380/2017) [2018] ZAKZPHC 1; 2018 (4) SA 242 (KZP) (16 February 2018)
Eskom failed to establish, on admissible and reliable evidence, that it had acquired a servitude by prescription over Mr Grundy's farm, as it could not prove when the power lines were erected. The court rejected Eskom's reliance on a retrospective wayleave agreement, finding that the electricity supply agreement did not incorporate the standard conditions, as there was no evidence that Mr Grundy received or signed them. The caveat subscriptor rule did not assist Eskom, as it applies to contractual terms, not to factual acknowledgments of receipt. Consequently, Eskom had no entitlement to reta…
Source excerpt
- Acquisitive Prescription
- Servitude
- Wayleave Agreement
- Contractual Incorporation
- Removal Of Electricity Infrastructure