ALSATIAN ATTACKS CHILD

Evening Star, Issue 22895, 1 March 1938, Page 11

ALSATIAN ATTACKS CHILD

SEQUEL-DAMAGES CLAIM ASSAULT COSTS OWNER £l2 A vicious attack on a child five years of age by an Alsatian dog was the’ basis of an action for damages brought on her behalf in the Magistrate’s Court this morning by her father, Albert Hanuagan, against the owner of the .animal, James M'Glashan Sloan. The assault on the child, which occurred at a picilic on November 7 last at Fraser’s Gully, cost the defendant a v total of £l2 11s lOd, and when awarding judgment Mr J. R, Bartholomew, S.M., remarked that it was fortunate that the child did not suffer more serious injuries., The plaintiff was represented by Mr D. A. Solomon, and Sloan, conducted his own defense. The claim was for £lO general damages’, £1 7s fid for hospital expenses, and £1 2s 6_d for damages to the clothing of the child. The action, said Mr s Solomon, was based on section 27 of the Dog Registration Act, which was to the', effect that the owner was liable for any damages as the result of an attack by Jiis dog. The defendant had pleaded guilty in the Police Court to being the owner of tbr Alsatian, which had since been destroyed by order of the court.. The defendant said it was his opinion that the child was not hurt to any extent, and he disputed the amount of the. damages claimed, though he admitted - the attack by the dog. He desired to plead hardship in this case, as ho was unemployed and bn sustenance.

The Magistrate: Then why were yon keeping a luxury animal like an Alsatian ?

The Defendant: I was in work then. Dr T. W. Harrison, a house surgeon at the Public Hospital, said that th® child was admitted to the institution suffering from considerable shock. There were lacerations and abrasions of the left buttock, lacerations and * wounds of the chest, and bruising of the back on the left side. The child was an out-patient_ at the Hospital from November 7 till November 30. The Defendant: Would the injuries

be permanent? Witness; No, not if they were properly looked after following treatment. The Magistrate said that the attack involved an unfortunate chapter of injuries. which could have been of a more serious nature. The child was robust enough and had not suffered any worse effects. Considering all ths circumstances and also the defendant’s financial position he would award the plaintiff £5 general damages and £2 10s fid special damages, with court costs (£1 Is 4d), solicitor’s fee (£1 11s), and witnesses’ expenses (£2 Is). He directed that the money be paid to the father. ,