Pangallo v ACTEW Corporation

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal from the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory in a dispute between Mr. Pangallo and ACTEW Corporation. Mr. Pangallo sought damages for personal injuries sustained when he fell from a ladder while working on a property. He alleged that ACTEW Corporation, as the supplier of electricity to the property, was negligent in failing to de-energise the power supply to a faulty light fitting, which he claimed contributed to his fall.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether ACTEW Corporation owed a duty of care to Mr. Pangallo, and if so, whether it had breached that duty. Specifically, the court had to consider the scope of ACTEW Corporation's responsibility in relation to the safe supply of electricity to a private dwelling and whether that responsibility extended to preventing foreseeable harm to individuals working on the property, even if the fault lay with the internal wiring or fittings. The court also considered the foreseeability of the risk of injury to Mr. Pangallo.

The High Court, comprising McHugh and Kirby JJ, ultimately found that ACTEW Corporation did not owe a duty of care to Mr. Pangallo in the circumstances of this case. Their Honours reasoned that ACTEW Corporation's duty was to supply electricity safely to the point of connection to the property. Once the electricity entered the property, the responsibility for the safe installation and maintenance of internal wiring and fittings, including light fixtures, rested with the property owner and any contractors engaged by them. The court held that it was not reasonably foreseeable that ACTEW Corporation's failure to de-energise the supply would lead to the specific type of injury sustained by Mr. Pangallo, particularly given the intervening cause of the faulty fitting and the manner in which Mr. Pangallo was working.

The appeal was dismissed.