Kelpie that bit home visitor on the face ruled ‘menacing’ by Civil and Administrative Tribunal

A dog owner will have to muzzle his quintessentially Australian canine in public after it bit a visitor to his Woodville Park home, leaving them in hospital for five days.

• Dog attacks jump 30 per cent in Tea Tree Gully
• Elderly man seriously injured at dog attack in Willaston
• Three women stand trial over pit bull attack

The owner of a “menacing” dog from one of the country’s most popular breeds says he is “absolutely devastated” after losing his appeal against having to muzzle his pet when out in public.

Josip Ivka, of Woodville Park, had tried to have a control order issued by Charles Sturt Council against his Australian kelpie-cross overturned in the Civil and Administrative Tribunal. But he lost his bid, meaning his dog, Roko, will have to wear a muzzle any time it is taken out in public.

He told Messenger Community News the tribunal’s ruling was “absolutely devastating” and described the attack by his dog Roko as a “freak accident”.

Last July, Roko bit mobile car detailer Bradford Reilly on the face, causing “serious and painful” injuries, the tribunal found.

Mr Reilly had knelt to look at the underside of Mr Ivka’s ute and, when he went to stand up, Roko attacked him without warning,

He was taken to hospital, where he was treated for multiple puncture wounds to his face. He also required a reconstruction of his central upper lip and was hospitalised for five days as a result of the attack.

A Kelpie at the Burnside Wading Pool. Photo: AAP/Emma Brasier

Prior to the bite, Mr Reilly had patted Roko without any reaction.

The council subsequently interviewed Mr Reilly and Mr Ivka and his wife, Margaret, who were invited to make submissions.

A council delegate then issued a control order on the basis of Roko being a menacing dog.

An independent assessment of the dog found it might be aggravated when its personal space was invaded.

The order placed restrictions on Roko, including that he would have to wear a muzzle when out in public.

Mr Ivka challenged the council’s action, saying Roko’s behaviour was “out of character” and he may have felt a need to protect his owner’s property.

He took his case to the tribunal, which last month ruled against him.

Tribunal executive senior member Mark Stevens said the dog had the potential to attack more people in future, which could “involve the risk of serious harm”.

He accepted that Roko was a “generally obedient and well-trained dog” with a “friendly disposition” but believed it could still pose a risk.

“I do not consider that the future risk can be described as remote or fanciful,” Mr Stevens said in his judgment.

“It is likely that from time to time, Roko may be in a situation where he perceives a risk to Mr Ivka’s property or person. Roko has demonstrated the capacity to cause significant injury by a single bite.”

Follow @TheCalebBond