DOGS IN MOTOR-CARS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 75, Issue 178, 30 July 1932, Page 10

DOGS IN MOTOR-CARS

SUCCESSFUL A.A. APPEAL Advice has been received by the secretary of the Wanganui Automobile Association, Mr F. J. Hill, of an Appeal Court case with regard to a dog. left in charge of a car, biting a child. Tho father of the child claimed damages from the own. r of the car. Tho London Automobile Association letter reads:— * * The Automobile Association has just successfully appealed to the High Court on behalf of a member whose dog, whilst left in a motor-car, had bitten a child. The parents of the child had brought an action for compensation but the jury were unable to agree. In taking the matter to the Appeal Court the A.A. asked for judgment to be entered for the motorist mainly on tho ground that there was no evidence that tho animal was dangerous, and consequently the motorist was entitled to leave the dog in the car. “Lord Justice Scrutton, in giving judgment said that dogs were not in the class of ferocious animals, and therefore the owner of the dog was not responsible unless the animal was actually known to have acquired vicious habits, of which the dwner was aware. “The decision, in favour of the A.A. member, virtually means that motorists can keep dogs, not known to be of a dangerous nature, in their cars, without incurring liability, should the animal injure a person who may trespass upon or tamper with tho vehicle.”