IJ v BS [2024] NZDT 645 (17 October 2024) [pdf, 191 KB]
...able to wander onto IJ’s property, in the absence of any evidence from BS about how that happened, raises the inference of negligence. b. L did not have the containment collar on when the incident happened. Again, in the absence of any other information it is reasonable to infer that this is due to a lack of reasonable care by BS. c. Even if N went onto BS’ property before the attack, this is irrelevant in terms of BS’ legal liability for any type of damage caused by L.