Law firm TARK successfully represented a client in a court dispute with a water and sewerage company that lasted more than four years. In the spring of 2021, the company carried out excavation work for a water pipeline on the street where the client’s property is located, during which it damaged the cable supplying electricity to the property. When the client began using the property in the summer, serious electrical problems emerged: the power supply fluctuated, some electrical appliances did not function, and an electrician engaged by the client prohibited use of the electrical system due to safety concerns.
The client notified the water and sewerage company of the situation and commissioned repair work from a third party to remedy the fault. After the company refused to reimburse the repair invoice issued by the contractor, the client paid the costs and submitted a claim for damages.
The trial court found that the company had unlawfully caused damage to the property owner and was therefore liable. However, it reduced the awarded compensation by approximately 50%, concluding that the repair expenses were not fully necessary or reasonable and that the company had been willing to remedy the damage itself.
The client appealed the part of the decision reducing the damages award. On December 23, 2025, the Court of Appeal issued a favorable decision, agreeing with the client and finding that the trial court’s reasoning did not justify a reduction of the damages claim.
The Court of Appeal emphasized that access to electricity at one’s residence is an essential benefit in modern society and that a person cannot reasonably be expected to discontinue its use due to another party’s unlawful conduct. The court also held that where use of the electrical system was dangerous, the client was entitled to remedy the fault immediately and was under no obligation to grant the responsible party a deadline to make repairs or to coordinate repair costs.
The Court of Appeal upheld the client’s claims for damages and default interest in full and ordered the opposing party to bear all litigation costs.
The client was advised by Rahel Behrsin, Attorney-at-Law, of law firm TARK.
