I was on the witness stand as an expert witness. The applicant has submitted an affidavit that a power line conductor broke off and set the veld alight. He claims he has lost hectares of valuable grazing, to wit, eragrostis teff. His affidavit would make a sailor weep. Owing to the loss of grazing, he has sold his cattle and culled his sheep. All at a loss.

He is, in fact, telling lies. I have been to his farm. It is too dry to grow eragrostis. I am appearing for the respondent, a municipality. It is my evidence that, in conditions of very high wind that blows trees over (as was the case), it is not unusual for a power line conductor to break off as a result of wind-induced vibrations.

The advocate for the applicant, a very top dog, addresses me: “When the power line conductor contacts the ground, what happens?” I tell him current flows through the ground and ultimately to the substation earth and into the supply transformer. He gives me a startled look. “Do you mean to tell this court that electrical current flows through ground? Through the earth?” The judge is a woman. “Yes, my Lady,” I say, “it does”. The advocate looks visibly shaken, as if I have told him that ostriches fly great distances. “Through . . . the earth?” he says in disbelieving tones. “The earth?” Yes, I say. The advocate turns to the judge and makes a helpless gesture. He says: “My Lady . . . what . . . ?” The judge looks over the top of her glasses. She says: “Mr Thingmajig, when lightning, a form of electricity, strikes from the sky and hits the ground, it goes somewhere. If it can’t flow through the ground, where will it go to? I suggest you accept what the expert witness says and move on.”

And I thought, here is this guy. An advocate. A legal expert. Who has never wondered what an earth leakage protection relay does. Who doesn’t believe that electrical current can flow though the ground. And, astonishingly, is involved in a legal case about a power line conductor which connected to the ground and started a fire. He is a top advocate in criminal matters. Why is he here?

Now it happens that, in South Africa, there is an Act called the Electricity Act 4 of 2006. In it is a clause that says: “Liability of licensee for damage or injury. In any civil proceedings against a licensee arising out of damage or injury caused by induction or electrolysis or in any other manner by means of electricity generated, transmitted or distributed by a licensee, such damage or injury is deemed to have been caused by the negligence of the licensee, unless there is credible evidence to the contrary.”

Thus, if damage or injury involves an electrical supply, then the party licensed for the creation of that supply is guilty of causing that injury, unless it’s otherwise proven. Thus, if you claim your crops burnt flat or you were injured or some damage was caused, then Eskom or the municipality has to prove it was not their fault or pay up. Thus, people employ top-dog advocates to win cases against witnesses for Eskom or the municipality. I am regularly called as an expert witness in these matters. The claims by applicants are varied and astonishing. They claim that sparks flew from power lines and set a boathouse alight, which burnt a very valuable boat to cinders. Or that the power line poles suddenly burst into flames. Or that they noticed a hacksaw next to a cable and when they picked it up, they got a shock. But what is startling is the astonishing ignorance of some advocates. When they interrogate me, they are clearly ignorant of any matter electrical. And yet they earn good money. Which, to paraphrase an old saying, makes you laugh, doesn’t it. We so need our legal system to have a competent technical, specialised court. Will it happen? One can but dream . . .