The fact that 3-year-old girls in Yunnan Dawan County were torn apart by a herd of dogs gave rise to numerous skin fractures. According to local authorities, the owner of the two dogs involved had been identified through the visit.
Counsel has analysed that the dog owner is liable and that if the victim is seriously injured, the dog owner will face criminal liability.
Earlier news reports that on the morning of January 6th, a 3-year-old girl's dream (alias) was torn by a dog playing outside her home The bites were towed, resulting in multiple skin fractures in the body, and after six hours of emergency surgery were taken to the intensive care ward. Surveillance footage shows that, prior to the incident, there were about seven dogs by their side.
Local authorities indicated to the press that, through the visits, the owners of the two dogs involved had been identified and were working according to the procedure.
There is also widespread concern about dog injuries that reflect the prevalence of untied dogs in rural areas.
As early as April 2021, the People's Government of Daguang County issued a public “notice to strengthen dog management”. It is clear that public areas such as county-wide organs and business units are strictly regulated by dogs, while other regions are general. Dogs authorized to be raised must only be reincarnated or cooped up, and if they do not cause harm to others without diversion, they shall be arrested and held liable according to the law.
Who's to blame for the fact that rural dogs only kill people? In an interview with the press, the lawyer of the Sichuan Dynasty Law Office, Hu Xian, stated that, according to article 1245 of the Civil Code, the principle of attribution of responsibility for animal accidents was applied in reverse, i.e. the responsibility of the breeder in the event of animal damage, except where the victim had committed intentional or gross negligence, “whether in rural or urban areas or irrespective of the economic capacity of the breeder, the dog owner is liable from the point of view of attribution unless it is proved that the injured person was guilty of gross negligence or intent”.
Hu also stated that animals may remain unbred or unmanaged after they have been abandoned and that if abandoned animals cause damage to others, civil liability should be borne by their original owners. Others are responsible for the long-term feeding of stray dogs and the injury caused by the bite.
“If the condition of serious injury or more is met, the owner of the dog shall be held criminally liable, liable for serious injury as a result of his negligence, and may also be guilty of a more serious offence against public safety, depending on the place of raising, the conditions of restraint, etc.”. He explained that if there was evidence that the dog owner knew that the dog was a dog of a strong nature, that there was a risk of causing serious injury to others, death, etc., but still failed to take measures to restrain the dog, or that the measures were inadequate, which resulted in the dog of a small part of the population causing serious injury or more, the dog owner would also face criminal liability, i.e. the offence of negligently causing serious injury.