A recent decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal
of South Africa will be of particular interest to liability
insurers who insure spread of fire risks. The SCA confirmed that
foreseeability of harm must only be taken into account when
evaluating negligence and not wrongfulness. The decision also
serves as a useful practical example of what may constitute
negligent conduct in these types of matters and what evidence will
need to be led to establish it. Just because one could have taken
additional steps to prevent a fire does not mean that liability
will ensue, if the preventative steps already taken were
sufficient, albeit ineffective.
In
MTO Forestry (Pty) Ltd v A H Swart NO [2017] ZASCA
57,the Supreme Court of Appeal considered an appeal by MTO in
relation to a veld fire that broke out on a neighbouring property
and spread onto MTO's land, destroying 1300 hectares of forest
and resulting in losses exceeding R23 million.
