Apil opposes animal liability reform

A proposed reform to the law on strict liability for injuries caused by animals has come under fire from the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (Apil).
The government is proposing to amend Animals Act 1971, s 2 which imposes strict liability on keepers of animals that cause harm or damage.
Currently, keepers of non-dangerous animals are strictly liable for harm if the animal had known dangerous characteristics shared by other animals within the species.

A House of Lords judgment in Mirvahedy v Henley [2003], in which the owners of a horse which spooked and bolted onto a dual carriageway were held strictly liable for the injuries that resulted, confirmed a broad interpretation of this law. This case is widely believed to have led to a significant increase in insurance premiums for equine and other animal-related rural businesses.

The proposed amendment offers keepers of animals a defence if they can show there was no particular reason to expect the animal to react in that way, and will reduce the number of claims that can be made.

However, John McQuater, president of Apil, said: “Whether it is a dog bite which leaves a child disfigured, or injuries caused by a horse on the road, there will be less protection for victims.

“The fact that the Government is making changes through the back door with little time for parliamentary debate is totally unacceptable.”