The Dog Owners Liability Act makes the “owner” absolutely liable for the dog's actions if a dog bite or dog attack occurs.
The Dog Owner’s Liability Act makes an “owner of a dog … liable for damages resulting from a bite or attack by the dog on another person …” The damages in this case resulted from a “bite or attack by the dog on another person”, and the owner is therefore “liable” under s. 2 of the Dog Owner’s Liability Act. In other words, a dog “owner” indisputably, is liable.
What also needs to be considered is Section 1 of the Act, which defines “owner” as including “…a person who possesses or harbours the dog … “. You may face defence saying that the defendant may be the owner but they do not harbour the dog or vice-verca.
In Purcell v. Taylor, [1994] O.J. No. 2845, December 13, 1994, Ont. C.J. (Gen. Div.), Borins J., after reviewing a number of authorities, concluded that “…a person does not harbour, within the ordinary meaning of “harbour”, unless he or she exercises some degree of care or control over the dog.” In that case, the owner had been permitted to stay on the defendants’ property with his dogs. Borins J. held that the mere fact that the owner and his dogs were given shelter or lodging did not make the property owner the “dog owner”. To be an owner, there must be an intention “to take care of it” (the dog).
The case of Graham v. 640847 Ontario Ltd., 2005 CanLII 30312 (ON S.C.) states that taking care of a dog requires, inter alia, feeding it and exercising it. All of this requires that a measure of control be exercised over the dog. In addition to providing shelter for the dog, the individual must temporarily assume those responsibilities toward the dog which dog owners customarily assume. To harbour a dog within the meaning of s. 1 requires more than the simple act of allowing it to be in one's home or on one's property together with its owner …
If you or a family member has been the victim of a dog bite or dog attack please do not hesitate to call or email Matt Lalande.