Western Cape High Court rules dog owner not liable for R350 000 ankle injury
A lower court initially accepted that the dog attack triggered a chain of events leading to the fracture and held Shaun Errol Bergstedt liable. Unhappy, Bergstedt appealed the ruling.
Image: AI Generated
The Western Cape High Court has cleared dog owner Shaun Errol Bergstedt of liability, ruling that a man's fractured ankle was not caused by a dog attack. The court determined that the injury resulted from William Henry Rhode's own fall after the dog had been secured.
The court ultimately found that it did not, concluding that the fracture resulted from Rhode’s own fall after the dog had already been secured.
The case stemmed from an incident in which Bergstedt’s dog escaped from his property and bit Rhode on the ankle.
Both parties agreed that the bite occurred and caused two puncture wounds.
However, Rhode later claimed the incident also led to a fractured ankle and sought damages of about R350 000.
A lower court initially accepted that the dog attack triggered a chain of events leading to the fracture and held Bergstedt liable.
Unhappy, Bergstedt appealed the ruling.
On appeal, the High Court focused squarely on legal causation.
During the trial, Rhode conceded under cross-examination that the fracture was caused by a misstep off a sidewalk rather than by the bite itself.
Despite this concession, the trial court had ruled in his favour, reasoning that the dog attack set in motion the events that ultimately led to the fall and injury.
The appeal court found this approach flawed, pointing to two critical issues.
First, it held that Rhode had effectively changed his case.
He originally pleaded that the bite itself fractured his ankle, but the trial court based its decision on a different theory - that the attack triggered a chain reaction leading to the injury.
The judges concluded that the fall - caused by Rhode’s failure to keep a proper lookout - was an independent intervening act.
In legal terms, it was too remote from the dog bite to hold the owner responsible for the fracture.
The High Court ruled that while the dog bite caused puncture wounds, it did not legally cause the fractured ankle.
The earlier finding of liability for the fracture was set aside, and Rhode was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.