Supreme courts rules City Of CPT liable in dog bite case
SUPREME COURT RULES CITY OF CAPE TOWN LIAIBLE IN DOG BITE CASE
The City of Cape Town lost their appeal in the Supreme Court of South Africa on Thursday, 1 October 2020 against three respondents of a dog bite claim.
The incident took place on Saturday, 7 December 2013 at Harmony Park Resort, a day camp situated at Strand in the Western Cape. The day camp is a public facility under the control of the appellant, the City of Cape Town.
Fatiema Carelse was attacked by a dog, causing her to sustain serious physical injuries as a result of which she developed post-traumatic stress disorder. She instituted action against the City in the Western Cape Division of the High Court in which she claimed damages. The action was based on the alleged negligent breach of a legal duty on the part of the City to ensure the safety of visitors to the day camp. The High Court declared that the City was liable for the damages.
The dog in question was owned by the second respondent Mr. Quinton Eksteen and brought to the camp by the third respondent, Mr. Dylan Eksteen who gained free entry through an unfenced area. Ms. Carelse was swimming in the tidal pool, playing with a ball, when the dog, a white pit bull attacked her.
The City defended the action instituted by Ms. Carelse. In its plea the City admitted that it owed the public, utilizing the facility, a legal duty but denied liability to her, stating that it had complied with its duty by taking reasonable precautionary steps to keep the facility safe and ensure the safety of the public. They indicated that the dog was brought unto the premises unlawfully since dogs were prohibited entry as indicated by appropriate notice boards. All persons were also searched thoroughly by security guards at the main entrance. It was however noted that the facility had three entrances and that these boards were not visible at two of them.
The City knew that 10-20 % of people gained entry through two of these entrances that had no access control and they knew that dogs were a problem since they were removed or impounded on a number of prior occasions. They should have foreseen the possibility that it was only a question of time before an attack would take place. They could have easily put up signboards at these entrances warning visitors not to bring dogs onto the premises.
The City also failed to provide supervision and access control at these entrances, which was negligent. The unfenced area was a weak-spot and the City could not explain why the fence had not been reinstated or why a single guard wasn’t placed at this entry point to prevent the entry of dogs or other prohibited items.
It transpired from evidence delivered by Mr Fourie; a First Inspector with the City’s Law Enforcement Division responsible for the area, that they were understaffed and the security arrangements relative to the crowd size was also inadequate. The appeal of the City of Cape Town was therefore dismissed with costs.
Says Tamlyn Melville from Simpsons Attorneys Inc, Cape Town, the instructing personal injury attorney in the case: “
“We are extremely happy with the outcome and that justice has been served in ensuring compensation for the damages our client has suffered. We trust that this will be a step in the right direction to ensure that our client can journey towards a process of healing from this very traumatic incident.“
ENDS
For more information please contact Tamlyn Melville on tamlyn@simpsons.co.za or 072 976 6766
Issued on behalf of Simpsons Attorneys by EchoVine Communications