Judge rejects condo’s bid to remove resident’s dog
The Straits Times
By: K.C. Vijayan,
Jun 29, 2017 04:06 pm
The facade of JC Residence condominium in Joo Chiat. Photo: Lianhe
A judge refused a condominium management corporation's (MC) bid to
remove a resident's dog from the condo premises, warning against misuse
through subjective interpretation of a condo by-law to force the move.
The management council of JC Residence in Joo Chiat had taken dog owner
Yan Wen Ting to court based on the woes of an aggrieved neighbour.
But five other residents in the 12-unit condo building came out in
support of Ms Yan, attesting that the dog did not show aggressive
behaviour or cause noise or trouble.
this is not a numbers game
"I should highlight that this is not a numbers game. The fact that an
animal causes annoyance to only one subsidiary proprietor does not
necessarily lead to the conclusion that there is no breach of (the
by-law)," said District Judge Clement Julien Tan.
The entire factual matrix of the
case has to be considered
"Conversely, even if the animal causes annoyance to many subsidiary
proprietors, this does not mean that (the by-law) is breached although
that is more likely to be the case. The entire factual matrix of the
case has to be considered," he added in judgment grounds issued last
week (June 20).
Ms Yan found the dog two years ago, when it was still a puppy, in an
area near the condo. She took it home and named it Mocha after her
favourite drink.
The MC claimed residents began to have problems with the dog at the
start, pointing out it was often left unleashed and showed aggressive
behaviour.
In May 2016, the management council advised the owner not to let the
dog run loose and to keep it muzzled at all times when it was in the
common areas of the property, warning her it would invoke the relevant
by-law to have the dog removed if she failed to comply.
Ms Yan, 24, apologised and took remedial action
Ms Yan, 24, apologised and took remedial action which included, among
other things, hiring a professional to train her in the skills needed
to handle the dog.
But about seven months later, one resident complained, recounting the
dog's aggressive behaviour towards him and that it was found unleashed
in the common areas.
Following his complaint, the MC through its lawyers wrote to Ms Yan in
January 2017, giving her two weeks to remove the dog or face legal
action.
Ms Yan apologised and, among other actions, hired a dog trainer to
teach Mocha and offered to have the parties seek mediation, but the
offer went unheeded.
At a meeting in February, the MC resolved to seek a court order to have the dog removed.
By the time the case went to court on June 9, the wife of the resident
whose complaint sparked the court action, reported two more incidents,
claiming the dog showed aggressive behaviour.
The MC's lawyer Harjeet Singh argued in court that Ms Yan broke the
relevant by-law, which should be read subjectively such that once an
animal has caused annoyance to an owner or resident, the by-law is
breached.
District Judge Tan disagreed and called for an objective approach,
requiring the court to take into account all relevant considerations,
"the touchstone being that of reasonableness".
A subjective interpretation of (the by-law)... would cultivate a
culture of pettiness and small-mindedness between neighbours
"A subjective interpretation of (the by-law)... would cultivate a
culture of pettiness and small-mindedness between neighbours.
Furthermore, if such an interpretation were to be adopted, pet owners
would face a great deal of uncertainty. They would be unsure of when
(the by-law) might one day be wielded against them by an unhappy or a
particularly sensitive neighbour. A subjective construction should
therefore be eschewed," said the judge.
to live harmoniously in a densely populated country like Singapore,
there should be a reasonable degree of toleration and give and take
between neighbours
"Such an interpretation could lead to By-law 14 being abused or misused
by unreasonable subsidiary proprietors or those with particular
sensitivities, phobias or aversions towards certain animals. In order
to live harmoniously in a densely populated country like Singapore,
there should be a reasonable degree of toleration and give and take
between neighbours," he said.
He noted that other than one family's complaint, there was no evidence
of complaints from others. The judge further noted the steps Ms Yan had
taken to be a more responsible dog owner.
the parties should have tried to resolve the
issue amicably—as earlier proposed by Ms Yan
District Judge Tan said the parties should have tried to resolve the
issue amicably—as earlier proposed by Ms Yan—before resorting to
legal action and ruled that removing the dog "would be disproportionate
to the alleged complaints as such".
Ms Yan defended herself in the case
Ms Yan, who defended herself in the case, said she has been a "lifelong
dog lover" and looked forward to moving on after the case.
top contents appendix
previous
next