Dog and law

Pies, just like any other pet, is a thing within the meaning of the law, and all provisions relating to things apply to it. It is therefore an object of property, which can be transferred by a contract between the owner and the buyer. Property can be transferred either by sale or exchange, and by donation, and even usucapion. The matter is simple, if the acquisition is made from the owner. Sometimes, however, the situation can get complicated, when the sale was carried out by a person not authorized to dispose of. If the buyer of the item acted in good faith, the thing becomes his property upon takeover, and the current owner may only pursue any recourse claims from the unauthorized seller. However, this does not apply to lost things, stolen or otherwise lost by the owner against his will, since ownership of such items cannot be acquired even by a bona fide buyer. However, he will obtain this right after the expiry 3 years from the moment the property was lost by the owner.

Therefore, you should not purchase dogs from strangers, because, apart from the doubtful acquisition of the ownership right, the buyer may be exposed to criminal sanctions for inadvertent receiving of stolen goods (arrest to 2 years or a fine), not to mention the situation of deliberate stolen goods (the acquisition with the awareness of the thing derived from the crime), punishable by up to 5 years in prison and fines.

All terms and conditions should be carefully discussed when selling, so in addition to the price, also the properties, for which the seller is to be responsible. Disclosure of a defect should be immediately notified to the seller with a declaration of withdrawal from the contract or a request to reduce the price.. Art. 563 of the Civil Code provides, that the buyer loses the warranty rights for physical defects, if he does not notify the seller of the defect within one month from its detection or within one month after the time has elapsed, in which, with due diligence, he could detect it. This deadline does not apply, if the seller has fraudulently concealed the defect, or assured the buyer, that the defect does not exist. If the defect is a disease, in order to secure the evidence, an opinion should be requested at the appropriate veterinary clinic.

Only then can the risk when buying a dog be reduced to a minimum, when the transaction is concluded with a breeder associated in a Kennel Club, but he should prove that he has a certificate or a certificate of origin of the animal. When purchasing an adult working dog (hunting or defender) it is advisable to conclude a written contract subject to a one-week trial period, during which the buyer - preferably with the participation of the seller - will be able to see if the dog has the properties needed to perform its tasks in the hands of the new owner.

The dog can also be leased (e.g.. paid rental of a hunting dog for the season), lease (e.g.. leasing a bitch for a certain period of time for breeding purposes), as well as lending (free commissioning). In addition, the dog may be pledged, as well as enforcement proceedings.

In criminal law, a dog may be the subject of misappropriation, and unlawful killing or damaging someone else's dog is punishable by imprisonment up to 5 years. Regardless of this, the perpetrator of killing or damaging the dog should, of course, compensate the damage caused to the owner. These crimes are prosecuted pursuant to Art. 212 § 3 k. k. at the request of the aggrieved party.

In criminal proceedings, the aggrieved party may, until the commencement of the trial at the main hearing, bring a civil action. Such an action should be brought and paid no later than at the commencement of the main hearing. In my experience, however, it is better not to combine a civil action with a criminal trial, but to submit them separately after the criminal sentence becomes final. It should be emphasized, that the crimes under Art. 212 k. k. can only be committed intentionally and only then can a conviction be expected, when it will be easy to prove the perpetrator of such willful guilt. In doubtful cases, like for example. damage to the dog by the driver of the vehicle, when it would be difficult to prove intentional guilt, the application for prosecution under criminal procedure should be abandoned. In general, criminal investigation should be limited to cases of the perpetrator's obvious ill will, because criminal courts must take all subjective moments into account, for acquittal of the perpetrator, which the perpetrator will be able to successfully cover himself. Regardless of the criminal proceedings, i.e.. a motion to punish the perpetrator pursuant to Art. 212 k.k., the injured party has access to a civil process for compensation.

As I emphasized, the prosecution in a criminal court should be limited to these only cases, when the guilt of the perpetrator is obvious and combined with the clear and unmistakable bad will of the perpetrator. Conversely, I advise each victim to pursue claims for damages in a civil action, even then, when the perpetrator's guilt is not gross (if, of course, the damage was not caused by an event not attributable to the perpetrator, like for example. running over the dog, which crashed into the road under the car, which the driver could not predict). Civil action for damages for the harm suffered (e.g.. killing the dog or medical expenses) may be brought at the plaintiff's choice to the court competent for the district, in which the act was committed, or to the court of the defendant's domicile.