Dog Bite (Tort): Difference between revisions

From Riverview Legal Group
Access restrictions were established for this page. If you see this message, you have no access to this page.
Line 16: Line 16:
<ref name="Curwen">Curwen v. Srivathsan, 2019 ONSC 6547 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/j3bmh>, retrieved on 2020-09-10</ref>
<ref name="Curwen">Curwen v. Srivathsan, 2019 ONSC 6547 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/j3bmh>, retrieved on 2020-09-10</ref>
<ref name="Strom">Strom v. White, 1994 CanLII 7342 (ON SC), <http://canlii.ca/t/1vtmt>, retrieved on 2020-09-10</ref>
<ref name="Strom">Strom v. White, 1994 CanLII 7342 (ON SC), <http://canlii.ca/t/1vtmt>, retrieved on 2020-09-10</ref>
==Swoffer and Bela, 2019 ONSC 3881 (CanLII)<ref name="Swoffer"/>==
[12] As a result of the dog bite, the Plaintiff suffered two puncture wounds to his left hand.  Photographs attached to the Plaintiff's affidavit herein show nasty wounds on either side of the hand which confirmed the Plaintiff's evidence to the effect that the dog's teeth actually pierced his hand.
[13] Immediately following the dog bite, the Plaintiff attended for medical attention. The attending physician describes the Plaintiff's injuries as consisting of two lacerations on the Plaintiff's left palm, one approximately two centimetres in length and one approximately five centimetres in length.  These lacerations were cleaned, sutured and bandaged.  Twelve sutures were required.  The Plaintiff also received a tetanus shot and was given a prescription for antibiotics.
<ref name="Swoffer">Swoffer and Bela, 2019 ONSC 3881 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/j2r82>, retrieved on 2020-09-10</ref>


==References==
==References==

Revision as of 19:33, 10 September 2020

Curwen v. Srivathsan, 2019 ONSC 6547 (CanLII)[1]

[11] Subsection 2(1) of the Dog Owners’ Liability Act states that the owner of a dog is liable for damages resulting from a bite or attack by the dog on another person or domestic animal. Pursuant to s. 2(2), where there is more than one owner of a dog, they are jointly and severally liable.

[12] The Defendants are the owners of Oscar and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the damages resulting from the injury to Zoe.

[13] Non-pecuniary general damages are those damages awarded for pain and suffering, injury to health, loss of ability to enjoy the normal amenities of life, and personal inconvenience which flow naturally from the injuries that were sustained: Strom (Litigation Guardian) v. White (1994), 1994 CanLII 7342 (ON SC), 21 O.R. (3d) 205, 1994 CarswellOnt 160, at para. 23 (S.C.J.)[2]. The “monetary evaluation of non-pecuniary losses is a philosophical and policy exercise more than a legal or logical one”:Andrews v. Grand & Toy Alberta Ltd., 1978 CanLII 1 (SCC), (1978) 2 S.C.R. 229, at p. 261.

[14] In Moretto v. Nicolini-Femia, 2017 ONSC 3945, at para. 62, Shaughnessy J. noted that case law is of limited utility in dog bite cases because the assessment of damages is very much case specific. The case law nonetheless provides some guidance as to a potential range of damages. In Moretto, both parties provided detailed expert evidence pertaining to the diagnosis and prognosis of the plaintiff’s injuries, which included facial scarring. Shaughnessy J. assessed damages for physical injury at $40,000 and damages for psychological injury at $5,000. A further $12,500 was awarded for future care costs for laser treatments and sunscreen.

[15] In Strom v. White, a six-year old boy suffered three lacerations with ongoing scars and psychological trauma resulting from a dog bite. Kozak J. awarded $22,000 in general damages. In Meloche v. Bezaire, [2005] O.J. No. 947 (S.C.J.), the plaintiff suffered ongoing trauma, pain and visible scarring on her leg and was awarded $30,000. In Zhan v. Kumar, [2008] O.J. No. 1102 (S.C.J.), the court awarded $35,000 in general damages to the plaintiff, who suffered lacerations to his face, residual numbness and depression.

[19] I accept the seriousness of the injuries suffered by Zoe, as well as her ongoing anxiety relating to dogs and to her appearance. However, there was limited medical evidence regarding Zoe’s current circumstances. Based on the evidence and the range of damages awarded in similar cases, I find that a reasonable amount for general damages for the injury suffered by Zoe is $37,500.00.

[1] [2]


Swoffer and Bela, 2019 ONSC 3881 (CanLII)[3]

[12] As a result of the dog bite, the Plaintiff suffered two puncture wounds to his left hand. Photographs attached to the Plaintiff's affidavit herein show nasty wounds on either side of the hand which confirmed the Plaintiff's evidence to the effect that the dog's teeth actually pierced his hand.

[13] Immediately following the dog bite, the Plaintiff attended for medical attention. The attending physician describes the Plaintiff's injuries as consisting of two lacerations on the Plaintiff's left palm, one approximately two centimetres in length and one approximately five centimetres in length. These lacerations were cleaned, sutured and bandaged. Twelve sutures were required. The Plaintiff also received a tetanus shot and was given a prescription for antibiotics.

[3]

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Curwen v. Srivathsan, 2019 ONSC 6547 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/j3bmh>, retrieved on 2020-09-10
  2. 2.0 2.1 Strom v. White, 1994 CanLII 7342 (ON SC), <http://canlii.ca/t/1vtmt>, retrieved on 2020-09-10
  3. 3.0 3.1 Swoffer and Bela, 2019 ONSC 3881 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/j2r82>, retrieved on 2020-09-10