Responsible Dog Ownership
On 18 October 2023, Chinelle van Niekerk was attacked by Gatlin, a Belgian Malinois trained for search-and-rescue. Chinelle was delivering dogs she had groomed to the Eilerd family, when Gatlin attacked her after she opened their door. Reports from neighbors indicate Gatlin is reactive, with several prior complaints made against the her. Chinelle is seeking R3.8 million in damages for medical costs, lost income, and pain and suffering in the Pretoria High Court.
Dog attacks are common in South Africa, and dog owners must recognize their significant responsibility to ensure public safety, especially when their dogs exhibit aggressive tendencies.
Actio de Pauperie
South African common law includes Actio de Pauperie, which holds animal owners liable for harm caused by their animals. To succeed, it must be proven that the defendant is the animal’s owner, the animal caused harm, was domesticated, not provoked, acted against its nature, and did so due to internal excitement or vice.
Defenses to liability include the plaintiff’s negligence, provocation, unlawful presence on property, or the volenti non fit iniuria defense, meaning no injury is done to a willing person. Liability is strict, meaning fault doesn’t need to be proven, only that harm occurred due to the owner’s actions or lack thereof.
An attack by a domesticated animal is generally considered wrongful unless the animal’s actions stem from its internal motivation. However, in the case of trained protection dogs, attacks may be seen as part of the dog’s nature.
Criminal Liability
Under the Animal Matters Amendment Act of 1993, dog owners who negligently cause harm to others can face fines or up to two years of imprisonment. Owners may also face criminal charges such as assault or culpable homicide, depending on the severity of the attack.
Owner Responsibility
The Actio de Pauperie emphasizes that dog owners are strictly liable for their animals’ actions, whether intentional or negligent. Owners of dogs trained for specific tasks, or with aggressive tendencies, bear even more responsibility. The Animal Matters Amendment Act reinforces this, stating that negligence is not an excuse for harm caused by a dog. Dog owners must always ensure their dogs are under control, both at home and in public.
To avoid liability, particularly for aggressive dogs, owners should take precautions such as securing gates, warning visitors about the dog’s presence, using a leash or muzzle in public, and ensuring the dog’s equipment is in good condition. Based on reports of Gatlin’s behavior, it seems unlikely that the dog acted contrary to its nature. However, Chinelle’s case may depend on whether the Eilerds took sufficient steps to secure Gatlin and whether they provided warnings.
Liability Scenarios
If a dog escapes and bites a passerby, the owner could be found negligent for failing to secure the dog. Similarly, if a dog bites through a fence, the owner may be liable unless the passerby provoked the animal. If a visitor is bitten while on the owner’s property, liability could stem from the owner failing to prevent harm.
If an aggressive dog bites someone in a public park while on a leash, the owner must show they took precautions to prevent the attack. Dog owners must recognize their responsibility, especially with aggressive dogs, and take every measure to limit risk and liability.
In all cases, responsible dog ownership is key to preventing harm and ensuring public safety.
