Pit Bulls to Be Seized After Nail Salon Maulings

The Western Cape High Court has ruled in favour of Theewaterskloof Municipality in its bid to seize three dogs that severely injured multiple people. This comes after a lower court decision that had blocked the impoundment. In a judgment delivered on 19 August 2025, Judge DM Thulare upheld the municipality’s appeal, and ordered dog owner Romanda Marais (“Ms Marais”) to surrender her two Pit Bull Terriers and mixed breed dog to the municipal pound by 26 August for evaluation.

The case was brought about by three separate attacks that occurred between November 2023 and March 2024 at Ms Marais’s Caledon property, where she operates a nail salon. The incidents left victims with serious injuries requiring hospitalisation and medical treatment.

The first attack occurred on 17 November 2023 when Ms Lizaan Brandt, an animal welfare volunteer, was mauled while collecting a foster cat. Court papers detail how the dogs jumped on her, bit her shoulders, arms, elbows, calf and shin, causing her to fall multiple times on the stairs as she tried to escape.

Two months later, client Ms Christi De Villiers was attacked during a nail appointment when Ms Marais opened a gate allowing the dogs into the salon area. Ms De Villiers was hospitalised for five days after suffering bites to both arms, her leg and buttocks.

The third incident involved building contractor Mr Victor Engelke, who was attacked in the backyard in March 2024 despite having arranged for the dogs to be secured while he worked. He sustained bites to both arms, wrists and his leg, and subsequently abandoned the construction project due to safety concerns.

Following each attack, municipal law enforcement officer Isaac Daniels fined Ms Marais R1,000 and obtained undertakings that she would control the dogs. However, when the attacks continued, the municipality moved to impound the animals under its public nuisance bylaws.

Ms Marais contested the action as she argued her dogs had been provoked in each incident and were not dangerous. She commissioned a private animal behaviourist evaluation that found the dogs displayed no aggressive behaviour. She also argued the municipality lacked authority to seize dogs for incidents occurring on private property rather than public spaces.

However, the court rejected these arguments and found that the municipality’s public nuisance bylaws clearly covered situations where animals on private property posed a danger to the general public. The judge was particularly critical of the “private evaluation,” which he described as “partisan” and noting the assessor failed to explain why injuries requiring five days of hospitalisation were merely “nips.”

“The three victims of the dog attacks were at the premises on different dates respectively for legitimate reasons. The three victims suffered grievous bodily harm inflicted by the dog bites,” the judge stated.

The court found that Ms Marais had failed to comply with municipal instructions to control her dogs and that the animals had become a public nuisance. The judge emphasised the municipality’s constitutional duty to promote a safe environment for residents.

Ms Marais had moved the dogs to a private kennel to avoid municipal impoundment, but the facility refused to release them to authorities. This subsequently prompted the court application. The dogs will now be evaluated by a municipal veterinary surgeon to determine whether they pose an ongoing threat to public safety or can be safely rehabilitated. If deemed dangerous, they may be humanely euthanised.

You can read the full Theewaterskloof Municipality v Marais judgement here.

Written by Theo Tembo