Durban - A Durban businesswoman would rather give up her plush multimillion-rand golf estate home than part with her “giant breed” dog.
Since 2012, Pathmasolahani (Rita) Abraham has been at odds with management of the Mount Edgecombe Country Club over the “weight” of her Saint Bernard dog, Theodore, who turns three in December.
According to the estate’s house rules, dogs must not weigh over 20kg when they are fully grown. The biltong-loving Theodore’s mass is 75kg.
Abraham challenged the estate’s management on the issue, claiming her family had a “tight emotional bond” with the dog and it was not fair that other families on the estate were allowed to keep big dogs.
Her fight then escalated to court, and on Wednesday Durban High Court Judge Peter Olsen ruled against Abraham’s plea to keep Theodore on her property.
He said the issue was “not the dog” but human conduct and compliance with rules.
Olsen gave Abraham three months to remove Theodore from her home and ruled that she and her son Edward, a co-owner of the dog, pay the legal costs incurred by the estate.
Abraham said her legal team was reviewing Olsen’s judgment and was likely to appeal against his ruling. If her appeal failed, she would not abandon Theodore.
“How would Theodore feel if we turned our back on him? If it means selling this house and buying another, I will do that,” said Abraham.
Abraham, who occupies the house with her two daughters, said: “We’ve been on an emotional low since the ruling.”
Their disappointment has rubbed off on Theodore.
“He has not been the same since Wednesday. I think Theodore picked up on our emotional state,” she said.
The strong “emotional bond” has been one of the driving factors in their legal fight with the estate’s management.
“Theodore is not an animal; to us, he is a part of our family,” she said.
The other sore point for Abraham and her legal team is that other homeowners on the estate have big dogs, some heavier than Theodore, but they allege management has turned a blind eye to this.
Abraham claims to have seen many Labradors, German Shepherds, two mountain dogs and another Saint Bernard at the estate.
“My question to the judge, the estate’s management and everyone else who accused us of not adhering to the rules is: why are we treated differently from the rest?
“If a concession can be made for other dogs, why not us?” she asked.
Abraham said she had a friend whose dog didn’t meet the 20kg requirement.
The friend applied to keep the animal and the request was granted by management.
When Abraham bought her property in 2000, she had not been asked to sign any “conduct rules”.
Her family moved on to the estate in 2002 and kept a small dog, but did not register it. That dog died in 2007.
Abraham said the rules for keeping dogs might have been in place and changed over the years, but she wasn’t aware of them and was startled when asked to register Theodore.
“Even then, we were not told decisively that we couldn’t keep Theodore, who had been with us for three weeks.
“A director on the estate’s board even told us at the time that the weight restriction would be amended. It would have been easier to part with Theodore then, not after three years,” she said.
Estate manager Terry Keller welcomed the ruling.
“The judge’s decision was clear in terms of dogs over the weight limit. It is up to the estate to pursue and enforce conduct rules,” said Keller.
Sunday Tribune