Kavanagh v Centreline Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Barron
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1987
• Neutral Citation: 1986 WJSC-HC 857
• Docket Number: D5676
• Court: High Court
• Date: 01 January 1987

KAVANAGH v. CENTRELINE LTD & ORS

PATRICK KAVANAGH

.v.

CENTRELINE LTD. & OTHERS MARTIN COOPER

MARTIN COOPER

.v.

CENTRELINE LTD. & OTHERS

1986 WJSC-HC 857

D5676

D5677

THE HIGH COURT

Synopsis:

ANIMALS

Dog

Mischievous propensity - Strict liability - Member of public attacked by guard dog - Dog had unblemished reputation - Defendant owner trained dog to attack and hold persons in certain circumstances - Dog escaped, or was released, from control of owner - Dog attacked the plaintiff in the manner, but not in the circumstances, taught in its training - Held that, although the dog had not been known to be dangerous, the defendant owner must be held strictly liable for damage caused by the dog when it attacked the plaintiff in the manner in which it had been trained to attack people - (Ct. App. - Barron J. - 6/10/86) - [1987] ILRM 306

|Kavanagh v. Centreline Ltd.|

NEGLIGENCE

Dog owner

Strict liability - Guard dog - ~Scienter~ - Member of public attacked by guard dog - Dog had unblemished reputation - Defendant owner trained dog to attack and hold persons in certain circumstances - Dog escaped, or was released, from control of owner - Dog attacked the plaintiff in the manner, but not in the circumstances, taught in its training - Held that, although the dog had not been known to be dangerous, the defendant owner must be held strictly liable for damage caused by the dog when he attacked the plaintiff in the manner in which it had been trained to attack people - (Ct. App. - Barron J. - 6/10/86) - [1987] ILRM 306

|Kavanagh v. Centreline Ltd.|

Citations:

BEHRENS V BERTRAM MILLS CIRCUS LTD 1957 1 AER 583

WORMALD V COLE 1954 1 AER 688

1 Judgment of Mr. Justice Barrondelivered on the 6th day of October1986.

2 Both Plaintiffs seek damages for injuries sustained following an attack on them by a Doberman Pincher dog on the night of the 23rd/24th January, 1984. Each sustained these injuries in separate incidents.

3 The first Plaintiff who was out jogging in a public park at 11 p.m. on that evening found that his track suit was caught by something. When he turned around he found that it was caught by a dog. Although he himself has purported to train Alsation dogs as handler dogs he failed to recognise the dog as a guard dog. He panicked and fought the dog. As a result the dog as it was trained to do held him by its mouth first below his left knee and then on both arms. There was a very considerable struggle which resulted in wounds to his left leg and right arm which required suturing. He got away from the dog and went home.

4 Later that night the second Plaintiff saw the dog in the same area as he got off a bus and was making his way home. He became apprehensive and clearly drew the attention of the dog because it followed him home. As he was unlocking his front door, the dog gripped his right leg below the knee. When the door was opened he rushed to get in and then tried to slam the door against the dog. In doing so his left arm was caught by the dog. He freed himself. Efforts were then made to catch the animal. He was fed frozen hamburgers and was caught by a car being driven over a lead which was attached to its collar.

5 The guards had been notified by both Plaintiffs of the attacks upon them. They arrived and took the dog...