Sorry to nitpick, but the inherent error rate of high throughput sequencing platforms is still higher than capillary sequencing. This is more than mitigated for by the massive throughput advantage though.
You can turn a Sanger run around relatively quickly (I'd guess hours). High throughput runs sequence many millions of fragments of DNA in parallel very slowly. The highest throughput runs take several days to complete.
This means that it's there are still (rapidly diminishing) scenarios where Sanger sequencing makes sense. Because you don't need the throughput, and you want an answer quickly.
Error rates are in the region of 1 to 0.1% generally.
I've never really worked directly with capillary data but understand it's error rate in early bases is limited by the amplification step. Which would be ~0.0001% (1 in 10000).
That said there might be a coarse filter (based on signal intensity etc) that would identify a subpopulation of high-throughput reads which have a <0.1% error rate. But I don't believe I've seen that reported. I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who has thoughts on that though.