Transnet will have to compensate 15 farmers who suffered damages due to fire most likely caused by the brake blocks of a passing train overheating to the point where it disintegrated and caused multiple ignition points in the railway reserve.
The fire spread onto the properties of the various plaintiffs - all farmers in the vicinity of the railway line.
They turned to the High Court in Bloemfontein, where they claimed damages. The amount of damages will be calculated at a later stage, as the court at this stage only dealt with liability.
The veld fires took place on August 11, 2012 around the railway reserve and railway tracks in the vicinity of the Karee railway station, Brandford, in the Free State.
While the farmers blamed Transnet for the fire, the train operator denied negligence. It said that its train was operated with the necessary degree of care and skill and was properly maintained. It denied that the fire originated as a result of overheated metal fragments and/or other mechanical fragments and/or sparks being deposited from a diesel-powered railway engine operated by it.
A cattle herder, Stefan Patella testified that on the afternoon of the incident, when he was about to feed the cattle, he saw smoke billowing. He noticed that there was a goods train approaching.
When the last carriage of the train passed him, he saw a flame from the grass erupt, rights next to the tracks. He tried to put the fire out with tree branches, but the fire came fiercely towards him and he ran to the farmhouse. By this time the fire was rapidly spreading.
An engineer meanwhile dealt with the possibility of trains causing wildfires. He testified that there were numerous causes of potentially hazardous hot materials and spark ignitions emanating from the train during operations.
The hazards could potentially arise from faults in the powerful internal combustion engines, electrical transmissions of power from engine to wheels, electrical resistance (dynamic) brakes, friction brakes on locomotives and wagons as well as steel wheels on steel rails.
Another witness testified that he visited the site of ignition three days after the fire. He saw burnt patches along the railroad. He picked up objects which were identified as disintegrated parts of a composite brake block.
While Transnet said the train was maintained and thus did not pose a fire danger, it appeared during the trial that certain documents regarding the maintenance of the train went missing.
These include the brake test, the load certificate and the locomotive trip report.
The court said the limitation in a definite conclusion on the cause of fire is the lost documentation. But, it added, the plaintiffs do not need to prove a definite cause as they rely on reasonable possibilities.
It was also found that Transnet’s case in defending the claims, was weak.
Acting Judge L Bomela said Transnet has the most to gain by ensuring the safekeeping of the documents as the records are the surest way of demonstrating that they had done the tests as alleged by it.
Similarly, the defendant (Transnet) also has the most to gain by the disappearance of these documents if they failed to carry out their duties.
The judge concluded that the plaintiffs have proven on a balance of probabilities Transnet’s negligent failure in either the manufacturing process, and/or in the maintenance and/or in inspecting the train with the necessary skill prior to it departure that day, caused the composite brake blocks to overheat to the point where it ignited and caused the fire.
Pretoria News