. Although different consequences may flow in criminal law compared with the law of delict, the test for unlawfulness is identical in criminal law and delict.Criminal liability ensues when it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that an accused person with capacity intentionally or negligently committed an unlawful voluntary conduct.
The test for whether a legal duty to act exists, which is informed by the values in the Constitution, was outlined in the case ofand entails that a legal duty to act exists when the legal convictions of the community direct that such duty to act exists and the omission thereof is regarded as unlawful.
A blanket imposition of an obligation to protect another person from harm would undoubtedly amount to enforcing pure morality while violating individual freedom to action. Legally we are not our brothers’ keepers’ and should not as a general rule be held liable for other people’s problems. But owners of vicious dogs are the custodians of their dogs and should be responsible and liable for the actions of their dogs.
Important, in the context of dog owners using the National Park. In (too) many cases, animals are left free to roam and are often involved in altercations, where victims feel there is no recourse Be aware of the specific requirements pertaining to this area and to the law