Contact
Dog bites | Dogs and private property

Can aggressive dogs be taken from Private Property?

When a dog on private property behaves aggressively toward people lawfully on the premises, questions arise about whether the dog can be leashed or even impounded to protect public safety, even within the bounds of private property.

This issue was central to the Cape Town High Court decision in TheewaterskloofMunicipality v Marais and Others (Appeal) (A223/24) [2025] ZAWCHC 355 (19 August 2025), where the full court of appeal had to decide whether the municipality could impound the dogs of the respondent in accordance with the applicable municipal by-laws.

In this case, the dogs in question had a history of violent behaviour and attacked three people on three separate occasions. It is important to note that at the time of each attack, the victims of the attacks were lawfully on the property at which the attacks took place. As a defence to the municipality’s case, the respondent contended that the incidents took place on private property and that the municipality therefore did not have the authority or the empowered by the municipal by-laws to impound the dogs. 

After considering the content of the relevant municipal by-laws and applying it to the facts of the matter, the court, on appeal, rejected the respondent’s contentions and held that the dogs were a danger to the general public and created a public nuisance as defined in the by-laws. The first respondent was accordingly ordered to deliver her dogs to the municipal pound, failing which, a municipal official would be authorised to impound the dogs.

This case not only illustrates that property rights are subject to the overarching duty to protect public safety but further highlights the importance for people to be aware of the content of the municipal by-laws applicable to their region. Although the court in this case held the dogs should be impounded, its decision may have been different had the municipal by-laws not made provision for the impoundment of dogs.

Disclaimer: This article is the personal opinion/view of the author(s) and does not necessarily present the views of the firm. The content is provided for information only and should not be seen as an exact or complete exposition of the law. Accordingly, no reliance should be placed on the content for any reason whatsoever, and no action should be taken on the basis thereof unless its application and accuracy have been confirmed by a legal advisor. The firm and author(s) cannot be held liable for any prejudice or damage resulting from action taken based on this content without further written confirmation by the author(s).   

December 1, 2025
Out with maternity leave, in with parental leave

Out with maternity leave, in with parental leave

by | Dec 3, 2025 | , , , ,

A landmark judgment delivered on 3 October 2025 by the Constitutional Court of South Africa has reshaped the legal landscape governing employment and family rights. In Van Wyk and Others v Minister of Employment and Labour; Commission for Gender Equality and Another v Minister of Employment and Labour and Others (CCT 308/23) [2025] ZACC 20, the Court declared several provisions of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997 (“BCEA”) and the Unemployment Insurance Act 63 of 2001 (“UIF Act”) invalid and inconsistent with the Constitution in that they unfairly discriminate between different classes of parents.

AI regulation on the horizon

AI regulation on the horizon

by | Dec 3, 2025 | , ,

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming industries, and everyday life. We now live in an era where information cannot be trusted at face value, and content creation blurs the lines between reality and fiction. With such a dangerous capability literally at anyone’s fingertips, it is normal to wonder whether AI is being regulated in South Africa. In this article, we look at the current position regarding AI in South Africa.

The tax distinction between local and foreign dividends

The tax distinction between local and foreign dividends

by | Dec 3, 2025 | , ,

Dividends from South African resident companies fall under the dividends tax regime and are subject to a 20% withholding tax in terms of section 64E of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (“Act”), known as dividends tax, rather than normal income tax. In contrast, foreign dividends are included in a taxpayer’s gross income unless relief is available under section 10B of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962, which provides a full or partial participation exemption depending on certain circumstances. In this article, we unpack the important distinction in the tax treatment of local vs foreign dividends in South Africa.

Sign up to our newsletter

Pin It on Pinterest