Liability for Animals Flashcards

1
Q

What are the four classifications of animal liability?

A

a. Liability for cattle trespass
b. Liability for dangerous animals
c. Liability for dogs
d. Liability for negligence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What are the applicable sources of law for liability for animals in Jamaica?

A

Common law and the Trespass Act

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is the liability for cattle trespass?

A

Where cattle in the possession of an individual intentionally or unintentionally stray on someone’s property

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is the principle in Cox v Burbridge (1863) 143 ER 171

A

If you own an animal that can be considered your property under the law, you have a responsibility to ensure that it does not enter your neighbor’s property. If it does, you are responsible for any damage caused by the animal, regardless of whether the animal escaped due to your negligence or not.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Wormald v Cole [1954] 1 All ER 683

A

A heifer belonging to the Defendant, knocked down and trampled the Plaintiff while trespassing in her garden. The Plaintiff sustained grievous injuries

Issue: Whether a Defendant may be liable for injuries sustained to Plaintiff where the Defendant’s cattle caused injury to the Plaintiff

Held: An occupier has a right of action and may recover damages which are the reasonable and natural consequences of the trespass

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is the Principle in Wormald v Cole [1954] 1 All ER 683

A

An occupier has a right of action and may recover damages which are the reasonable and natural consequences of the trespass

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Is there any liability for cattle trespassing from the highway?

A

No, the owner of land running next to public road is deemed to have consented to run the risk of the dangers incident to the ordinary, on-negligent use of the highway

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What does Scienter mean?

A

scienter refers to the owner’s knowledge of the animal’s dangerous tendencies or propensity to cause harm.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What are the two classifications of Scienter?

A

Animals that are ferae naturae and animals that are mansuetae naturae

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What does ferae naturae mean?

A

Animals that are naturally fierce, wild and dangerous

Eg-lions, tigers, gorillas, bears and elephants

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What does mansuetae naturae mean?

A

naturally tame animals, harmless

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

In what circumstances is the keeper of an animal mansuetate nature liable for harm caused by that animal?

A

the particular animal has shown a propensity in the past to do harm of that kind

the owner or keeper is proved to have had knowledge of such propensity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is the principle in McIntosh v McIntosh (1963) 5 WIR 398

A

where a domesticated animal
does something which is merely an exercise of its natural propensity, damage caused
as a result is not recoverable.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Who can be sued for liability under the scienter doctrine?

A

the person who keeps and control the animal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What defences are available to a defendance for a scienter claim?

A

contributory negligence

volenti non fit injuria- a person who knowingly and voluntarily risks danger cannot recover for any resulting injury.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What is the principle in Wright v Callwood [1950] 2 KB 515

A

Where no special circumstances exist, negligence cannot be established merely by proof that a defendant has failed to provide against the possibility that a tame animal of mild disposition will do some dangerous act contrary ot its ordinary nature