Is Pain And Suffering For The Loss Of A Pet Compensable?
We value and cherish our pets and, in some cases, even consider them family members. However, the law considers pets property and is "coldly unemotional" towards pets, in many cases valuing them as just another consumer product.
However, a few cases have evaluated whether owners who lost their pets due to the negligence of others, should be compensated for the pain and suffering caused by the loss of the pet?
In Ferguson et al v Birchmount Boarding Kennels Limited et al, the court considered the distress caused by the loss of a pet that escaped the play area of a boarding kennel. The court ruled that the kennel had been negligent in that it visually checked the fence to the play area but did not conduct a more thorough check of the fence when it realized that the fence could be damaged by the use of a riding mower to mow the play area. The court awarded damages in the amount of $1417.00 for the distress suffered by the lost dog's owner.
Similarly, in Arnold v Bekkers Pet Care Inc., the court evaluated whether a kennel's failure to keep proper records about the symptoms and care of a pet that was boarded. the dog sickened and had to be euthanized during its stay at the kennel. The court granted damages for pain and suffering in the amount of $1750.00.
Finally, in Nevelson v Murgaski, damages for pain and suffering in the amount of $1750.00 were granted when a pet was attached by two dogs owned by a neighbour.
All three cases illustrate that courts are not immune to the human factor that individuals do care for their pets. While pets are still viewed as property and the compensation for loss is set at the value of the property (I.e. a $500.00 award will be made for the loss of a pet that cost $500.00), there is recognition that the property in question is not inanimate like a toaster or television but rather a living breathing creature capable of adding value to life.
The Lesson: While the loss of a pet may trigger feelings of loss, court awards of compensation are generally modest and unlikely to be proportionate to the feelings of loss.
Ferguson et al v Birchmount Boarding Kennels Limited et al, 2006 CanLII 2016 (ONSC) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onscdc/doc/2006/2006canlii2049/2006canlii2049.pdf
Arnold v Bekkers Pet Care Inc., 2010 CarswellOnt 11118 (ONSC)
Nevelson v Murgaski, 2006 CarswellOnt 7818 (ONSC)
The content and the opinions expressed here is informational purposes only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. Nor does reading or commenting on it create a lawyer/client relationship with the author. I encourage you to contact me directly at adrianlawoffice@gmail.com if you have specific legal questions or concerns.
http://adrianlawoffice.wix.com/mysite
If you are an individual looking for assistance with a legal problem, contact Adrian Law for professional and cost-effective advice. adrianlawoffice@gmail.com
The author encourages you to share this article on social media.
Follow me on Twitter @gwendolynadrian