Bouali v Rangihuna

[2020] NSWDC 720

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Bouali v Rangihuna [2020] NSWDC 720

Hearing dates:

11 November 2020

Date of orders:

20 November 2020

Decision date:

20 November 2020

Jurisdiction:

Civil

Before:

Judge Levy SC

Decision:

1. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $49,500;

2. The defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs on the ordinary basis unless otherwise ordered;

3. The exhibits may be returned;

4. Liberty to apply on 7 days’ notice if further or other orders are required.

Catchwords:

TORTS – plaintiff attacked in public park by defendant’s unleashed bulldog – liability established pursuant to s 25 of the Companion Animals Act 1998 (NSW) – aggravation of pre-existing physical and psychological symptoms; DAMAGES – assessment of claimed heads of damage

Legislation Cited:

Civil Liability Act 2005 (NSW), s 5D, s 5E, s 16

Companion Animals Act 1998 (NSW), s 25

Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 60

Cases Cited:

Daw v Toyworld (NSW) Pty Ltd [2001] NSWCA 25

Mt Isa Mines Ltd v Pusey (1970) 125 CLR 383; [1970] HCA 60

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Souad Bouali (Plaintiff)
Mathew Rangihuna (Defendant)

Representation:

Counsel:
Mr R Brown (Plaintiff)
Mr H Halligan (Defendant)

Solicitors:
Wyatts Lawyers (Plaintiff)
Young & Muggleton (Defendant)

File Number(s):

2019/64921

Publication restriction:

None

Judgment

Nature of case and background

1. The plaintiff, Mrs Souad Bouali, seeks damages from the defendant, Mr Mathew Rangihuna, for physical and psychological injuries she sustained in a public park on Saturday, 27 February 2016. At that time she was forced to fend off the defendant’s unleashed bulldog which was attacking her 2 year old daughter at Tillman Park, in Sydenham, NSW. In that attack the plaintiff’s daughter received severe facial injuries that required surgery. The proceedings are governed by the Companion Animals Act 1998 (NSW) and the Civil Liability Act 2005 (NSW) (“CL Act”)

Issues to be determined

2. The defendant did not dispute his liability to the plaintiff for damages. The only issues requiring determination in these proceedings concern the nature and extent of the plaintiff’s injuries and the assessment of the plaintiff’s entitlement to damages for such injuries.

Evidence overview

3. The plaintiff was the only witness called to give oral evidence. The plaintiff adopted the factual content of a chronology that was prepared on her behalf: Exhibit “A”. The parties produced a Court Book containing relevant medical records, reports and documents: Exhibit “B”, pp 1 – 420.

Facts

4. In the paragraphs that follow I set out findings as to the plaintiff’s background circumstances, her previous health, the bulldog attack, the plaintiff’s injuries, her treatment and related medical assessments, and her remaining disabilities.

Plaintiff’s background

5. The plaintiff was born in Morocco. She is presently aged 33 years. She is married and has five children. She and her husband arrived in Australia in 2013 to seek a better life. The bulldog attack occurred when she was aged 29 years. She has never been in employment. She has not had any schooling. She is illiterate both…