bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

paywallTypes

createdDate

publishedDate

sponsorType

urlAlias

moreOnThisArticles

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

articleSpeeches

socialHeadline

headline

images

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

A couple who sued their neighbours for $20 million over the violent death of their pet dog had abandoned reasonableness and reality in their five-year pursuit of a case with no legal basis, a judge ruled yesterday.

In a judgment described by the defendants' legal team as 'a triumph of common sense over absurdity', Deputy High Court Judge Ian Carlson dismissed the case brought by lawyer Eugene Oh  and his psychologist wife, Grace Chin,  and awarded costs to bankers Kate Richdale and  Yan Su Zher.

'It is a complete vindication,' said Deacons litigation partner Kevin Bowers of the result.

Ms Chin and Mr Oh 'were clearly barking up the wrong tree', he said.

Mr Oh and Ms Chin sued for negligence and damages after their shih-tzu Sha-Sha was mauled to death in the driveway of their neighbours' home by the couple's two mongrels, Jasper and Lady. They said Sha-Sha had broken its leash and run over to the neighbours' gate, through which the mongrels had pulled it.

The couple said they suffered post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a result of the attack.

A simple case had become 'a nightmare', resulting in nine court actions and the admission to hospital of Mr Oh for 56 days after he collapsed during a criminal trial on the matter, the judge said.

'Any sense of reason, proportion or good judgment has been suspended,'  Judge Carlson said.

'This whole action has been brought on an entirely unreal basis which the law cannot support. These defendants have been forced to endure litigation at the hands of plaintiffs who are out of control,' the judge said.

He found the plaintiffs were not suffering PTSD and said their unquestioning love and support for each other worsened the situation.

'The sad death of a pet dog has been allowed to change the whole course of their lives which, on a most basic level, now threatens them with financial ruin.'

Attempts to draw a parallel between witnessing the death of a pet and witnessing the death of a person as a catalyst for PTSD did not work, he said. He also found Ms Chin's story of how Sha-Sha ended up in the defendant's garden 'suspicious' in light of the fact the animals were allowed to roam free in the village and the allegedly broken leash had never been produced.

'These are two witnesses whose evidence I approach with the greatest trepidation,' he said.

The couple had been the authors of their own downfall and  Judge Carlson noted they had used their 'obsessive, irrational behaviour' with regards to the case as evidence they were suffering PTSD.

The judge left it up to Ms Richdale and Mr Yan to seek further costs, which Mr Bowers said would run into  millions of dollars.

Even if Ms Chin's version of events were true, the judge found the precautions Ms Richdale and Mr  Yan had in place for containing the dogs were 'entirely adequate'.

Mr Oh yesterday said he and his wife were disappointed with the judgment and would  appeal. He believed the judge did not know enough about the law on mental injuries to have come to the conclusion he had.

'It's such a skimpy judgment,' Mr Oh said. 'It reads like an emotional outburst - it doesn't sound like legal jurisprudence. [The judge] didn't cover all the evidence.'

Mr Oh said his and his wife's suffering was genuine. 'The judge was wrong to say we went on and on. We did suffer enormously because of the dog threat.'



Judge scathing in tossing out $20m lawsuit over dead shih-tzu