DEPARTMENT FOR
ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS News Release (69/09) issued by
COI News Distribution Service on 27 March 2009
Horse owners could
benefit from cheaper insurance premiums under plans to clarify
owners' liability announced by Farming Minister Jane Kennedy today.
The proposals, published today for consultation, would amend the
Animals Act 1971 to clarify owners' liability should their
animals cause damage.
The law in its current form lacks clarity and means that animal
keepers face the prospect of being held strictly liable for damage
or injury regardless of any actions they may have taken to prevent
an incident from occurring.
Ms Kennedy said:
"We aim to give animal owners peace of mind when giving
their horses or other animals the space and the exercise they require.
"This small amendment means that, if they've taken
reasonable precautions and their animal causes damage, the owner
will no longer be held strictly liable.
"This is great news for all animal keepers, especially as it
could even lead to lower insurance premiums - something which I
know would be very welcome to many rural businesses."
The amendment would mean that all animal owners or keepers must
continue to take reasonable precautions to prevent accidents
occurring, and they would remain liable for any negligence on
their part, but it would introduce new and clearer criteria for
the application of strict, no fault, liability in cases where the
accidents could not have been predicted.
Notes to Editors
1. The Animals Act 1971 covers owners' liability for damage
done by animals, and section 2(2) deals with the application of
strict liability to the owners of animals that cause damage in
certain situations.
2. Strict liability is liability without fault, which means the
keeper of the animal is liable for any damage caused regardless of
any actions taken to limit the likelihood of it occurring.
3. The precise meaning of section 2(2(b) of the Act, which refers
to strict liability applying where the characteristics that caused
the damage are not normally found in animals of the species or not
normally found except "at particular times or in particular
circumstances", has been the subject of debate and
disagreement since the Act came into force. This uncertainty was
heightened by the House of Lords' judgement in Mirvahedy v
Henley [2003], concerning injury caused by spooked horses, which
effectively extended the range of circumstances where strict
liability could apply.
4. Insurance premiums for many land-based and equestrian
businesses rose significantly in the period following the
Mirvahedy judgment in 2003 - it is estimated that public liability
premiums for commercial riding establishments rose by 79% in 2003,
39% in 2004 and 34% in 2005. While evidence of a direct link
between the Mirvahedy judgment and the premium increases is
difficult to find, the Government believes that a clarification of
the law could lead to reduced premiums, although this is a matter
for insurance companies.
Public enquiries 08459 335577;
Press notices are available on
our website
http://www.defra.gov.uk
Defra's aim is sustainable development
To subscribe
or unsubscribe to Defra's mailing list go to:
http://nds.coi.gov.uk
Once on the NDS website see Sign up
Nobel House
17 Smith Square
London SW1P 3JR
Website http://www.defra.gov.uk