header-logo header-logo

09 July 2009
Issue: 7377 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Apil opposes animal liability reform

Personal Injury

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.”

Issue: 7377 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll