The edictum de feris in South African law
The edictum de feris has apparently only once been applied by a South African court[5801]—a dog had been taken onto a public road and had bitten to death an ostrich that was lawfully feeding on the commonage adjoining that road—but it has been mentioned in a number of other decisions.[5802] According to WesselsJA,[5803] "canis", in terms of the edict, refers only to a vicious dog, not to "a lady's lap dog".
On the authority of Brunnemann[5804] wild animals other than those specifically mentioned in the Edict have been held to be included—as, for example, snakes and crocodiles.[5805] Occasionally, a departure from the requirement that the animal must have been kept in the vicinity of a public road has been suggested,[5806]" but in O'Callaghan v. Chaplin—where a dog had caused the damage in a private house—the edictum de feris was not in fact applied.[5807] Liability is still, predominantly, regarded to be strict.[5808]7.
More on the topic The edictum de feris in South African law:
- The edictum de feris in Roman law
- South African law of partnership
- Specific performance in South African law
- Causa and consideration in South African law
- The actio de pauperie in South African law
- Condition, lex commissoria and rescission in South African law
- Vicarious liability in South African law
- The actio de pastu in South African law
- SOUTH AFRICAN DEVELOPMENTS
- Fragmenta Ad edictum libri lxxx (ad edictum praetoris libri lxxviii. ad edictum aedilium curulium libri ii)
- I Ad edictum libri IV-XV
- Trusts in South Africa and Scotland
- Beggiato Martina et alii (eds.). Iulius Paulus: Ad edictum libri IV-XVI. Roma – Bristol: L'Erma di Bretschneider,2022. — 380 p., 2022
- The North/South divide: a political stake
- Republic of South Africa
- Food or Drug in South Korea
- Experiences from Local Government in Ethiopia, South Africa and Zimbabwe