Pretoria - Acting Judge Norman Davis was not impressed that the barking of a little Chihuahua managed to make its way on to the urgent roll last week.
“This is a matter concerning a barking dog… It is to be depreciated that a high court is burdened with such a dispute. It is equally deplorable that the parties cannot resolve an issue of this nature,” Judge Davis said. The Kranskop Owners Committee, which owns an eco holiday estate in Mpumalanga, turned to the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, to force a resident to get rid of his dog. This was after other residents complained bitterly about the dog’s barking, which was not only a nuisance, but also scared away antelope, giraffe and other wildlife roaming the estate.
The rules of Kranskop are clear: no pets.
But Carel de Jager and his mother Margie got special permission from the association to keep the little dog, said to be highly trained and “something equivalent” to a guide dog.
While De Jager, 37, is not blind, he suffers from emotional problems, and his pastor recommended that the association make an exception in his case as he desperately needed a companion dog.
He had been involved in a car accident in 2012, which left him house-bound for a long time.
A counsellor said his observation was that De Jager was a lonely man.
“Life did not make any sense to him. He was not in contact with his emotions. In my experience a companion pet is often the correct treatment,” the pastor said in a letter to the committee.
While he knew there was a no-pet policy, giving a person something to live for should be more important than being rigid. “It is a small, trained dog which could not harm anything. It will remain in the house at all times and it is similar to a guide dog,” he said.
The committee relented, but made it clear that if there was any trouble, the dog would have to go.
Since 2013 the committee has received various complaints from other residents that the dog barked early in the morning when kudu and other buck roamed around. It even barked when the cleaners arrived.
The residents took pictures to prove that the barking dog did not stay in the house all the time and roamed outside. It was also said that De Jager was no longer home-bound and had obtained work nearby.
The association then revoked its permission for the man to keep the dog, pending the finalisation of the court application.
The dog, however, remained on the property.
It emerged that De Jager was so devastated at losing his friend that he attempted suicide.
It was claimed the attempt was directly related to the threats that his dog would be taken away.
The court was told the man stabbed himself in the leg, in the stomach and cut off his penis.
His mother refused to get rid of the dog and there was a lengthy legal argument before court whether she had to subscribe to the rules of management.
It was said that although she paid a monthly levy and enjoyed all the benefits of living there, she didn’t join the committee as she did not own the unit they were staying in.
The judge said that whether they were owners or not, they had neighbours who had to be respected and were entitled to the peaceful use of their property and enjoy nature.
The judge said the mother and son could not encroach on the rights of their neighbours in this regard.
However, he gave the Chihuahua a lifeline and said De Jager may only keep his dog if it did not roam around outside the house.
The dog may not be left unattended, and all steps must be taken to ensure it was not a nuisance. If not, the applicant should return to court, Judge Davis said.