I am legally responsible for the damage caused by my horses

I am legally responsible for the damage caused by my horses

Even the most disciplined horse will were sometimes and accidents can sometimes result. In these situations, horse owners are likely to be left confused on the degree of responsibility that they have shares in the horse and to know if they will be responsible to pay compensation for the damage.

The relevant legislation

The issue of civil liability of the owners for the damage that is done by their animals is governed by the animals Act 1971 (The Act). This Act applies both to the animals that belong to a dangerous species and animals that are not dangerous.

Article 2, paragraph 2, of the Act provides that everywhere where the damage is caused by an animal which is not dangerous, as a horse, the owner of the animal is liable for damages if the following conditions are met:

The damage was of a type that could be done if the animal has been rampant;
The probability of the damage was due to characteristics which the animal who normally are not in this type of animal, or located in this type of animal at specific times and in special circumstances.
The reference to the above characteristics were known to the owner

If, for example, when a horse is exceptionally aggressive and territorial (and the owner is aware of this) pursues and injures a member of the public using a trail that crosses its field, the owner is responsible for.

The House of Lords judgment Mirvahedy v Henley.

While the Act set out in the Act appears to be simple and reasonable, the interpretation that the courts have given to the Act in case Mirvahedy v. Henley 2003 imposes a heavy burden on the equestrian community.

In this particular case, the defendants kept a horse in a field which was surrounded by a fence in solid wood and an electric fence. One evening, the horse has been badly surprised and percé fences, traffic on a mile along a trail, basket, then a B-road, before news on the A380, where it has been affected by the claimant. The claimant was injured and his car was severely damaged.

The defendants argued that they were not responsible because they have taken all reasonable precautions and had not been negligent. However, the claimant argued that because of the wording of the Act, it had imposed strict liability - which means that pet owners have been responsible for the damage even if no there was no fault of their own.

This case went up to the House of Lords, where it was decided by a majority of two to one, the defendants were liable for damages. The House of Lords said that the damage was a feature usually caused by horses, horses that is usually found in a State of panic except in particular circumstances and that the owners were aware of this. Because the Act contained no mention of any other hurdles to be overcome to ensure the responsibility (i.e. a requirement for the defendant was negligent or reckless) responsibility must be rigorous.

This causes problems for horse owners that all reasonable precautions can be taken to avoid damage or injury, but the owner can be held responsible for any damage. ?

Are there exceptions to liability?

The animals Act contains a number of means of defence to strict liability for damage caused by the animal. The exceptions which are most relevant for the equestrian community are the following:

The damage is entirely the fault of the injured party
This corresponds to the general rule of law that someone who is responsible for his own injuries are not able to make a claim for damages. An example would be a novice rider who suffers an injury after the hiring of a horse and riding to gallop on a dangerous after being informed slope do not.
The injured party has accepted the risk of damage
This corresponds to the general rule of law that a person who voluntarily accepts the risk may not make a claim for damages that result from this risk, as indicated in the legal latin "volenti Non Fit Injuria" (no harm is made to a willing person). For example a derby jockey runs the risk associated with this activity and is obliged to accept the risk of injury.
The injured party has suffered damage while intrusion
An example would be a member of the public who enters a field as an intruder and is injured in a scuffle after stirring the horses in a movement of panic.

If you are faced with an action relating to the damage caused by your horse, and you believe that one of these exceptions may be applied if you take legal advice. That a defence is successful, you will need to prove to the Court that you satisfy all the legal and factual defence requirements, and if you give an element on your case may fail on a technicality.

Related positions Am I legally liable for damage caused by My horses
Visit the equestrian for sale property.