<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Government Archives | Lawyers for Companion Animals</title>
	<atom:link href="https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/category/government/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link></link>
	<description>Animal Lawyer of Australia</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Dec 2018 21:53:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Housing commissioner had no duty of care to dog attack victim, lawyers argue</title>
		<link>https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/housing-commissioner-had-no-duty-of-care-to-dog-attack-victim-lawyers-argue/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[FLOSS FLOSS]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2017 03:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Animal Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[animal law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dangerous dogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dog Attack]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/?p=1470</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[July 16 2015 Christopher Knaus IMAGE ABOVE: Patrick Hartigan and Joanne Mangan with their son Jack, 12, who was mauled by two pit bulls when he was just six years old Photo: Melissa Adams The ACT&#8217;s social housing commissioner had no duty of care to a young boy mauled by two vicious dogs at a Griffith home, lawyers have [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<header class="article__header">
<div class="article__toolbar">
<div class="article__datetime"><time class="signature__datetime" datetime="2015-07-16T23:17:01+1000">July 16 2015</time></div>
<div class="article__datetime">Christopher Knaus</div>
<div></div>
</div>
<div><em>IMAGE ABOVE: Patrick Hartigan and Joanne Mangan with their son Jack, 12, who was mauled by two pit bulls when he was just six years old <cite>Photo: Melissa Adams</cite></em></div>
<div></div>
<div class="social--share-wrap">The ACT&#8217;s social housing commissioner had no duty of care to a young boy mauled by two vicious dogs at a Griffith home, lawyers have argued.</div>
</header>
<div class="article__body">
<p>And even if that duty of care existed, the government has argued it acted reasonably and could not have known the dogs were a hazard while they were inside and under the control of their owner.</p>
</div>
<figure id="fm-id-9" class="media media--photo social--sharing is_fm-analytics-component-tracking is_fm-image-sharing is_fm-toggle" data-fm-image-sharing="twitterTag:'canberratimes'" data-event-tracking-enabled="false" data-track-data="{&quot;name_component&quot;:&quot;Inline_Image&quot;}"><figcaption class="media__caption"></figcaption></figure>
<p>Jack Hartigan, now 11, was attacked by the dogs while visiting the public housing property on his first play date in late 2010.</p>
<p>He suffered horrific injuries, and has sued the ACT&#8217;s commissioner for social housing.</p>
<p>It is alleged that the government had been warned about the two dogs and the danger they posed repeatedly, yet did nothing to ensure the property was safe.</p>
<p>On Thursday, barrister Vanessa Thomas, representing the commissioner, put her closing submissions to the ACT Supreme Cour</p>
<p>She said there was no duty of care owed to Mr Hartigan by her client.</p>
<p>Ms Thomas argued that her client, unlike Domestic Animal Services, had no power to remove the dogs, or prohibit them from being on the premises.</p>
<div id="subscribe-newsletter" class="panel panel--subscribe is_fm-newsletter-subscription" data-channel-key="qmijur57bxF1rHojHDpApA" data-newsletter-id="10063" data-authentication-url="https://authman.f2.com.au/oauth2/authorise" data-subscription-url="https://api.myfairfax.com.au/services/v3/newsletters/newsletterIdPlaceholder/subscribe" data-newsletter-env="prod">
<div id="newsletterSignUpContent" class="content">
<header class="header">
<div class="newsletter-icon">That only left two options: issue a direction to the tenant about the dogs &#8211; which she was unlikely to have complied with and was not enough to create a duty of care &#8211; or evict her.</div>
</header>
</div>
</div>
<p>An eviction, Ms Thomas argued, would have been contrary to the central purpose of the commissioner&#8217;s role in providing public housing to those in need, and therefore did not create a duty of care.</p>
<p>&#8220;My client has a statutory obligation to provide housing to people in need and in my submission that extends to keeping them in housing when they are in need,&#8221; she said.</p>
<p>She argued the tenancy agreement held no prohibition on the woman keeping pets.</p>
<p>&#8220;There was no basis on which my client could require her to get rid of these dogs,&#8221; she argued.</p>
<p>Ms Thomas argued laws that gives landlords a duty of care to visitors only applied to the physical state of the premises.</p>
<p>She argued that the duty being claimed by the plaintiff was &#8220;novel&#8221;, and did not fit into any accepted category of duty of care, requiring the plaintiff to prove the characteristics of the relationship that proved such a duty.</p>
<p>Ms Thomas said that had not been done.</p>
<p>Further written submissions will be received from Mr Hartigan&#8217;s lawyer, John Purnell, SC.</p>
<p>Earlier on Thursday, Mr Purnell told the court that the knowledge of the dogs on behalf of Housing ACT was the central issue.</p>
<p>He said the government knew there was a danger, in the form of two dogs, at the premises.</p>
<p>Justice Hilary Penfold will reserve her decision, but warned it may take some time to hand down.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/housing-commissioner-had-no-duty-of-care-to-dog-attack-victim-lawyers-argue-20150716-gidr3c.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/housing-commissioner-had-no-duty-of-care-to-dog-attack-victim-lawyers-argue-20150716-gidr3c.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
