[ad_1]
A new ruling from the Supreme Court of Appeals will have important implications for the rights and responsibilities of dog owners in South Africa.
The sentence, which was handed down on Friday (September 11), revolved around a gardener and garbage collector, who was attacked without notice or motive by three dogs in the street.
His injuries were serious and resulted in the loss of his left arm. Said he didn’t anything to provoke the dogs and was legally present on the public highway where the attack occurred. Subsequently, he filed a claim for R2.4 million in damages.
The owners of the dogs were not at home at the time of the attack and denied responsibility.
The basis of this defense was that the dogs had been locked inside the property, but an intruder must have tried to gain access through a closed gate, broken both locks that held it, and left the gate open or in a state where the dogs could open. that.
SCA judgment
The victim’s complaint was based on the legal principle that goes back to Roman law, known as’action on poverty‘- which holds that the owner of a domesticated animal is normally strictly liable for the damage caused by that animal.
Under this action, the injured party does not have to prove negligence on their part and a victim of a dog bite can claim damages from a dog owner without having to prove fault.
In its ruling, the SCA said that there are three recognized defenses to such a claim:
- That the aggrieved party was in a place where he had no right to be;
- The animal was caused by the victim or by a third party;
- That custody and control of the animal has passed to a third party who negligently did not prevent the animal from causing the damage.
The owner’s argument that these defenses should be extended to include any situation where the damage was caused by negligence on the part of a third party was rejected by the court.
He held that constitutional norms did not justify such an extension and that when the damage is caused by a domesticated animal, it is in principle appropriate that the responsibility for that damage lies with the owner of the animal and not the injured party.
“If anything, with the growth of urban life, the huge increase in companion animals, especially dogs, in our towns and cities, and the opportunities for harm they pose, that vision of where the interests of justice lie has been strengthened. ” the court said.
“People have the right to walk our streets without having to fear being attacked by dogs, and when such attacks occur, in most circumstances they should be able to seek reward from the dog owner.”
The SCA subsequently dismissed the dog owner’s appeal and determined that it could compensate the victim for the injuries.
You can read the full ruling below.
Read: Cape Town Police Are Using This New App For Driving And Other Fines – Here’s How It Works
[ad_2]
