Legal Question

Very complicated - you could have. However no solicitor is going to take it on as a no win no fee and you could end up paying a solicitor a lot of money and losing the case. Certainly do not do this unless absolutly sure of your case.

Some solicitors do a free initial consultation so go and give them the facts and see what they say.
 
I can't see how you could just blame one person when some horses are carriers and a lot of people could have unknowingly come in contat with the disease and then passed it on.
 
Without going in to the why's and where's - one person would be responsible in this particular case.
 
In the majority of cases when you consider sueing someone there is only two winners & those are the solicitors that act for each of the parties. Never sue on a point of principal either...it's too expensive.

Unfortunately occasionally you get Strangles outbreaks, most prevalent at dealer yards where horses come & go regularly but it can be bought to a yard in several different ways. Knowing & proving how it got there & proving negilgence is more difficult that it first appears. Just treat & forget it.
 
thats a hard one ... like a pervious poster as said ....



"can't see how you could just blame one person when some horses are carriers and a lot of people could have unknowingly come in contat with the disease and then passed it on. "

I was possibly in your situation a few weeks back .


all fine now though thank god
 
Did the one person know her horse was infectious and likely to infect others (i.e. didnt take adequate precautions to prevent it passing on?)

If she/he did then you could probably sue for loss (vets bills, lost entries etc) but you would have to prove that:

the other horse had strangles
owner knew it had strangles at the time of passing it on
the owner knew the consequences of not isolating it.
your horse caught is from this animal.

I suspect it is probably a long-shot.
 
You can't sue for something that hasn't actually happened - i.e. you say your horse has not caught strangles and therefore has no injury or consequent losses and expenses to be compensated for. A horse itself cannot be compensated for any injury as can people. Compensation is limited to financial losses and expenses, but can include such things as loss of value of the horse due to an injury. As a general rule, if anyone is considering making a claim, there has to be a duty of care between the two sides in the first place (such as employer/employee, doctor /patient etc) and there has to be a negligent breach of that duty leading to an injury that was otherwise avoidable. The negligence has to cause the injury or loss complained of. If it doesn't or hasn't, then there is no claim even if negligence can be proved. This is called proving causation.

Alternatively or sometimes in addition, there has to be a breach of contract (not necessarily negligent) or a breach of statutory duty - a duty written in law, such as many of the workplace regulations are. Some of these do not need negligence either and can be strict liability, but in all cases they need to have caused some sort of injury or loss before compensation can be awarded. Otherwise there's nothing to be compensated for.

As a disclaimer, you must always take your own legal advice on the precise circumstances of your potential case before taking any action or failing to take an action based on anything said on here.
 
[ QUOTE ]
You can't sue for something that hasn't actually happened

[/ QUOTE ]

No I appreciate that, and this is just hypothetical at the moment. However she may well get strangles becuase of the idiocy of one person responsible for ensuring that the disease doesn't spread!

So was just curious really.

Thanks
 
Hypothetically, unless there is a duty of care between giver and receiver of the disease, you couldnt sue. So if a person came to a show with it and your horse caught it there you would have no cause of action. The only situation I can think of in which a sufficient duty could exist would be if your YO invited someone else to move their horse onto your strangles free yard knowing it was carrying the disease; or perhays if a dealer deliberatley sold you a strangles horse with knowledge that you had a healthy one at home.

Even if you could establish duty of care, there would be evidenciary difficulties in proving that the negligent act with the duty attached was what caused your horse to catch it--could they reasonably suggest that there are other outbreaks in the area and you could have picked it up at a show or from a field you passed whilst hacking? If so then you are going to have trouble proving they actually caused you your loss. In any case, I rather suspect that your legal fees would be significantly higher than any losses the disease actually causes you. If you can get a solicitor for a free consultation to outline your chances of success and with that you can persuade them to settle out of court, great. Otherwise I wouldnt bother unless you yourself are a lawyer and have enough spare cash lying around that you wouldnt mind paying the other party's legal costs in the likely event that you couldnt prove your case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top