SEREMBAN: A mother and her young daughter who were attacked by two Rottweilers at a residential area here have been awarded more than RM223,000 in damages in a negligence suit against the owner of the canines by the Sessions Court.
The mother - beautician and aesthetic consultant Lim Chwee Tin - was 36 and her daughter was seven when the incident happened on April 27, 2019.
They were walking past the defendant's house in Kepayang Heights when they were attacked by the dogs.
Judge Surita Budin in her written judgment awarded the victims RM95,000 in general damages, RM36,469.60 for special damages and RM88,000 for loss of income.
She said that due to the negligence of the defendant, both plaintiffs had suffered injuries and damages.
The plaintiffs were walking by the defendant's house after an evening walk at Kepayang Hill on the said day when all of a sudden one of the dogs came out from the house and attacked the girl.
The mother tried to shield her daughter by hugging her but the dog continued to bite the first plaintiff on her hand.
The court found that the defendant only came out of her house after the biting incident.
While trying to pull her dog back into her house, another Rottweiler attacked the mother by biting her on her left palm.
The attacks only stopped when a neighbour came to their rescue.
"Upon in-depth consideration of the rival contentions and the whole spectrum of the pleadings and evidence, the court found that on the balance of probabilities that the plaintiffs had successfully proved their case and made a finding of facts that the dogs were under the custody, control and ownership of the defendant had caused injury to plaintiffs.
"Therefore, the defendant breached the duty of care when it failed and/or refused and/or defaulted in ensuring that the dogs were kept, controlled and cared for properly resulting in an unforeseen attack on the plaintiffs.
"Consequently, the court ruled that the defendant was 100% negligent and liable for causing the injuries suffered by both plaintiffs,"she said in her written judgment posted on the judiciary's website yesterday (Sept 24).
Surita had delivered her oral decision on July 15, and the defendant has since filed an appeal to the High Court.
The defendant had claimed that the first plaintiff's conduct of holding a wooden stick had provoked the dogs, causing them to break out from the gate and attack her.
She had also claimed that the canines were fully trained, vaccinated and licensed by the Veterinary Department since 2018.
The defendants went on to argue that the dogs were not the type which could injure or provoke anyone unless they are provoked or if someone were to trespass on the premise they guarded.
Judge Surita said the defendant had the knowledge that the Rottweiler has a reputation of aggressive behaviour and this evidence was supported by the dogs trainer and veterinary officer.
"The court takes cognizance of the fact, through my own research, that this species earned them the nickname Rottweil Butchers Dog and that alone speaks volumes," she said.
Surita said the defendant had also admitted that the dogs had previously attacked another neighbour's dog and killed it outside her house.
"Ultimately, the defendant should have realised and learnt from the first incident. It is crystal clear that the defendant has knowledge of the gravity of the dogs aggression and of their vicious propensities to bite or attack human beings," she said.
She said there was also sufficient evidence that the defendant had failed to obtain a dog license and this was only done after the incident.
There was also evidence, she said, that the dogs were not vaccinated on the day of the incident.
The court also allowed costs and interests of 5% for general damages from the date the plaintiffs had sued the owner of the dogs and 2.5% for special damages from the date of the incident until the date of judgment.
