What happened

On 9 November 2016, a five-year-old playing in a neighbouring backyard climbed onto a fence rail to try to calm barking dogs. With his hands on the fence capping, he was attacked by the dogs and sustained permanent scarring and psychological effects. The owner was away, and the dogs had been contained in her yard.

The issues

The central liability question was whether the exception in s 25 of the Companion Animals Act 1998 applied because the child was unlawfully on the dog owner’s property. Quantum also required assessment of future earning disadvantage and treatment for a child whose eventual occupation could not yet be predicted.

The court's decision

The court distinguished the child’s position when the attack began from the possibility that a dog subsequently pulled part of him across the fence. There was also no evidence of intentional provocation, so statutory liability applied. Judgment was entered for AUD 315,500, with ordinary costs payable separately unless otherwise ordered.

Understanding the figures

The historical AUD 315,500 award comprised AUD 230,500 for non-economic loss, an AUD 75,000 future earning-capacity buffer and AUD 10,000 for future treatment. The claimed AUD 100,000 earnings buffer and AUD 20,000 treatment allowance were not awarded in full. Costs were separate.

What this case shows

Touching the fence did not establish unlawful presence on the owner’s property; the timing and location of the initial attack mattered. For future earning loss, the court used a buffer grounded in permanent disfigurement and limits on outdoor work rather than assuming a particular career.

Why another case may differ

Liability turned on the statutory dog-attack provisions and their exceptions, rather than proof of ordinary negligence. Proven unlawful presence or intentional provocation could produce a different result. Damages reflect the Civil Liability Act 2002 assessment in 2020; 35% of a most extreme case was neither whole person impairment nor contributory negligence.

Applying it to your claim

Different facts, evidence or procedures, an appeal, or a change in the law may affect how this decision applies. This is general information, not a report of a case handled by Park & Co Lawyers.

Considering a second opinion? →