Whos responsible??

In a agility training club in a public place

If the trainer tells the owner to let her dog off the lead and the dog runs off and attacks another dog who is responsible for it?

if
A, the owner informs the trainer that the dog is perfectly fine offlead and the dog seems focused before going off the lead
B. If the owner insists they are not confident letting the dog off the lead in that situation but the trainer tells them too
C. If the dog attacks another dog who is in the class
D. if the dog attacks another dog who is not in the class

Just wondering

What is a public place? Do you mean in a park or similar?

Personally I'd go with the owner being responsible regardless but SB may know differently.

rune

Hopefully both the owner and the trainer have the relevant insurance ie

public liability
employers liability
professional indemnity

the cover should be quite clear in terms of geography etc.

If not, do not pass GO do not collect £200.............

Even if both were insured it would still be a question of whose insurance paid out.

I would go with whoever made the decision being responsible.

If the owner told the trainer the dog was OK then it is the owners responsibility as they would have misinformed the trainer.

If the trainer, as the relative expert/authority figure, told a reluctant owner to let their dog off, knowing them to be reluctant, imo it would be the trainer's responsibility as they would have effectively overruled the owner and not taken due account of the reasons for their reluctance.

However if a disclaimer had been signed the terms of that may specify responsibility, likewise if the dog attacked was participating in the same event they may have accepted the risk in attending, as a condition of entry.

Someone outside would presumably legally be in a public place where they were entitled to be, without having signed any disclaimer or acceptance of risk.

In actual fact court cases and insurance companies disputes over such issues do arise, resulting in court decisions, or out of court settlements being decided after considering the balance of the evidence.

For this reason many "have-a-go" agility courses insist all public dogs can only try the course while onlead, or have the course enclosed.

Of course sometimes people just wing it and hope for the best.

Yes I mean a park - quite a few clubs train in parks round here

Yup I agree, Im kinda meaning moraly rather than financially - but even with insurance whos insurance would be paying out

Well I wanted some more info but:

The first thing to consider is

Duty of care

Was a duty of care owed by someone to someone else?

If yes, was that duty of care not fulfilled?

And finally was any injury actual and was it directly related to the failure of duty of care?

This is for civil claims, and the burden of proof is "balance of probabilities"

Under the H & S Work Act 1974 (criminal case) again an employer has a duty of care to any one who may be affected by his or her activities eg employees, contractors, visitors, members of the public.

Failure to adequately meet this duty of care may result in prosecution under the HASAWA 1974

Does this make things any clearer?

The problem with hypothetical cases is that each case is generally unique so no hard and fast answers can be given without knowing all the facts.

I am of the belief that one is responsible for one`s own dog. In these circumstances, the owner would be responsible IMO, but anyone being injured would consider a claim against the organisers as well as the owner. In extreme circumstances they might also sue the local Authority as owners of the venue.

Yeah, its just something that got me thinking cos I have been in 2 classes now and the trainers kept insisting Mia was fine to be let off the lead
Finally because I doubted myself, thought they knew better, and knew Mia wouldnt attack another dog anyways I did let her off the lead

I wont lie, it was funny seeing the trainer trying to body block Mia
No harm was done - she just wanted to flirt with the big male

I guess the owner SHOULD know their dog better than anyone but us plebs sometimes believe that the trainer has some higher skill than us and go against what we think is right

If it happens again I will just say no, she isnt ready for that yet

Morally in all of the above it would be the owner IMO. However, I'd seriously have to question a trainers judgment if they encouraged an owner who's dog was known to be iffy, to be let off lead in such a situation.

The person who owns the dog is always responsible for the dog's actions imo. If somebody told me to stick my head in the oven and I gassed myself just because somebody in authority told me it's safe to do so, I certainly couldn't blame the person who told me to do it because I have a choice! You makes your choice and you pay the consequences. If somebody else's dog in that class attacked mine, then I'd sue both the owner and the trainer for damages, because they are both at fault, because even if the trainer told her to let the dog off, it still comes back to that choice of the owner, who made the wrong one!

That's all a bit gobbledigook, but I know what I mean!