An Ontario dog walker who was attacked by a large Boxer in 2022 has lost her appeal to sue her clients for $1 million after two judges determined she was technically the “owner” of the animal at the time of the incident.
The dog walker arrived at the Oshawa, Ont., home of her clients on March 24, 2022 to let out their two pets, including Forrest, who was five years old at the time.
According to an agreed statement of facts, Forrest was battling a paw infection at the time and a veterinarian had advised that he wear rubber booties in wet areas when outside to prevent further complications.
As the dog walker attempted to put the booties on Forrest for the first time, he attacked.
“She had the booties in one hand and approached Forrest’s paw to put on the bootie, when Forrest is said to have lunged at her, bit into her left arm, and started shaking,” court heard. “After eventually getting her left arm loose, Forrest is said to have continued to attack her, biting her on various parts of her body. The Plaintiff sustained injuries to her abdomen, left upper thigh, and both arms.”
Court records show that Forrest had no history of aggression towards the dog walker prior to the attack, but would bark “excessively” at her in the owners’ presence. The dog’s owner had also successfully put the booties on Forrest five times earlier without incident.
In a statement of claim filed Jan. 10, 2023, she sued the couple for general damages totaling $1 million.
What is an ‘owner’ under Ontario law?
The lawsuit was dismissed by both the Ontario Superior Court and the Ontario Court of Appeal due to the fact that under the province’s Dog Owners’ Liability Act (DOLA), the dog walker was the “owner” of the dog at the time of the incident.
The DOLA defines owner as a person who “possess or harbours” a dog and as such is liable for damages resulting from a bite or attack by the dog on another person or domestic animal.
“The appellant was the sole person in the company of the dogs at the time of the incident… As was found by the motion judge, she was unquestionably the person in a position to control the behaviour of the dogs at the critical time,” wrote Justice Renee M. Pomerance.
The courts both used a previous Ontario case of a dog attack in making their judgements. In 2013, a woman took her boyfriend’s Great Dane Zeus out for a walk when she was bitten. In that case, the woman lost her thumb above the joint. She sued, but ultimately lost the case as she was determined to be the dog’s “owner” at the time of the attack.
The dog walker’s lawyers had argued that this case was different, due to the fact that the incident occurred in the “true owners” home. They also argued that the only reason she was putting the booties on the dog was because the owners told her to do so.
However, Pomerance disagreed.
“This, too, is of no legal significance. It is not uncommon for dog owners to give instructions to those hired to care for their dogs, whether in matters of feeding, walking, administering medication, or other care instructions. The person in possession of the dog is best placed to assess whether, when and how such instructions are to be carried out.”
