In a court litigation that spanned 20 months

A mother requests 100,000 dirhams in compensation for a “dog bite”

The civil court decided in a legal debate that spanned nearly a year and eight months because of a “dog bite” that a Gulf girl was subjected to, which prompted her mother to write a complaint against the owner of the dog who left the door of his cage open, then attacked and bit her daughter, and after looking into the penal part that ended with a conviction The owner of the animal and a fine of 2000 dirhams, the mother filed a lawsuit before the civil court, demanding a material and moral compensation of 100,000 dirhams, and after considering the papers submitted by the lawyer, Muhammad Al-Awami Al-Mansoori on behalf of the plaintiff, the court imposed a fine of 15,000 dirhams to the victim.

In detail, the incident began on November 24, 2019, when the attack occurred, so the mother wrote a report to the Rashidiya police station, in which she stated that the accused had endangered her daughter's life as a result of leaving the cage door open, so the dog came out of the house, attacked and bit her daughter at the bottom of the far side of the right humerus, and the top of the front The right forearm, and caused her injuries included in the forensic report.

After investigating the incident, the Public Prosecution referred the accused to the Criminal Court of First Instance, which sentenced him in his presence to a fine of 5,000 dirhams, so the Public Prosecution appealed the ruling, and after considering the appeal by the Appeals Court, it also convicted him, but reduced the fine to 2,000 dirhams only, from what was assigned to him. Then the verdict became final and final because it was not appealed to the Court of Cassation.

For her part, the mother decided to transfer the case to the civil court after settling the stage of the criminal justice, and her lawyer, Muhammad Al-Awami Al-Mansoori, confirmed that as a result of the defendant’s action and his lack of control over his dog, the mother suffered material and moral damage, the first being the expenses she incurred on her daughter to treat her from the injuries she suffered. her, presenting her to the medical centers and the continuous follow-up until her recovery, as well as the moral damage that the girl suffered.

For his part, the defendant, “the dog’s owner” submitted an obligatory memorandum, “at the conclusion of which he petitioned the court not to accept the lawsuit to file it without any capacity, and its incorrectness or seriousness, as well as the lack of harm, demanding that the plaintiff (the mother) be obligated to pay fees and expenses and in return for fees, but decided The case management office referred it to the civil court, which examined it and issued its ruling.

In its rationale, it affirmed that the mother has a capacity and has the right to seek compensation for material and moral damages to her daughter, noting that the judgment issued to convict the defendant by the Penal Court has binding evidence before the Civil Court, and the latter must abide by the ruling in examining the civil rights related to it, so that its judgment does not contradict the previous penal ruling.

She pointed out that according to Article 314 of the Civil Transactions Law, an act harmful to animals is the responsibility of the person who has control over them, whether he is an owner of them or otherwise.

She explained that by applying the law to the facts of the case, we find that the Public Prosecution accused the defendant of endangering the life of the victim (the girl) by leaving the door of the animal cage open, which led to his exit and attacking the girl, causing injuries to her, and then the Criminal Court ruled to convict him, so it is limited The role of the civil court in determining the amount of compensation.

The civil court stated in its justifications that the plaintiff demanded compensation for the material damages represented in the treatment expenses, but the lawsuit papers were devoid of what indicated the value of the expenses incurred, so the court refuses to compensate her for the material damages.

With regard to moral damage, the court considers that there is no doubt that the mother has suffered moral damage in the form of panic and fear for her daughter, and therefore she is entitled to compensation in the amount of 15,000 dirhams, and obligated the defendant to pay fees and expenses and in exchange for attorneys' fees.

Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news