Much of Northland was without power for three days when a maintenance crew removed the nuts from the pylon base. Photo \/ Michael Craig<\/p>\n
The High Court has rejected an attempt to bring a class action against Transpower and its maintenance contractor Omexom on behalf of thousands of Northland businesses affected by the collapse of a transmission tower in June 2024.<\/p>\n
\n The action, brought by two Northland businesses, could have covered as many as
\n 24,000 businesses seeking compensation for losses caused by the widespread power outage.\n <\/p>\n
However, Justice Victoria Heine, sitting in the High Court in Wellington, found the businesses\u2019 circumstances and the types of losses they suffered were too varied for the proposed opt-out class action to proceed.<\/p>\n
The ruling, dated October 21, does not determine whether Transpower or Omexom was negligent or liable for the losses. The judge also left open the possibility that the plaintiffs could bring a differently structured claim.<\/p>\n
The proceedings followed the collapse of Tower 130 on June 20, 2024. <\/p>\n
The defendants accept that an Omexom maintenance crew removed the nuts<\/a> securing three of the tower\u2019s four legs to its baseplates at the same time, causing it to lift off the baseplates and fall.<\/p>\n Power was partially restored that evening, but full restoration was not achieved until the afternoon of June 23.<\/p>\n Authority review<\/p>\n An Electricity Authority review, carried out at the energy minister\u2019s request and chaired independently by Sarah Sinclair, found in September<\/a> 2024 that Transpower had relied too heavily on its contractors and that its assurance processes were inadequate. <\/p>\n It also found that a senior Transpower engineer warned in 2021 of gaps in maintenance crews\u2019 training for baseplate work, and that this was not acted on.<\/p>\n However, the authority withdrew a formal complaint against Transpower in May 2026 after receiving the grid operator\u2019s expert evidence. <\/p>\n It said it no longer considered that Transpower had breached good electricity practice in its assurance processes and oversight of Omexom.<\/p>\n Omexom had earlier refused to release<\/a> its own investigation into the collapse to the authority, claiming legal privilege because the report was prepared in anticipation of litigation.<\/p>\n Skibo, a paint and specialist coatings business, brought the proposed class action claiming $5,355 in lost gross profit, and Hold Group, which operates the Delish ice cream business in Russell, claimed about $1,400 for spoiled stock. <\/p>\n Hold Group was formally joined as a plaintiff in the ruling.<\/p>\n They alleged Transpower and Omexom owed duties of care to Northland businesses and breached those duties through inadequate training, supervision and oversight of the maintenance work.<\/p>\n The plaintiffs sought to represent affected businesses on an opt-out basis, meaning eligible businesses would automatically be included unless they chose to withdraw.<\/p>\n Transpower and Omexom opposed the application, arguing the circumstances of individual businesses were too different for the key questions of liability to be determined collectively.<\/p>\n Justice Heine agreed there were common issues surrounding the collapse, the maintenance work and the resulting outage.<\/p>\n