Results
Title |
Author | Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inst. of Cetacean Research v. Sea Shepherd Conservation Soc. | 725 F.3d 940 (9th Cir. 2013) | 2013 A.M.C. 169513, Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 52422013, Daily Journal D.A.R. 6656 | After the Institute was denied an injunction in the trial court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an injunction preventing Sea Shepherd from attacking any of the Institute’s vessels in any way and from coming within 500 yards of any Institute vessel operating in the open sea. | Case | |
| Institute of Cetacean Research v. Sea Shepherd Conservation Soc. | 708 F.3d 1099 (C.A.9 (Wash.),2013) | 13 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2117, 2013 Daily Journal D.A.R. 2467, 2013 WL 673712 (C.A.9 (Wash.),2013) |
Several whalers brought suit against Paul Watson and the Sea Shepard Society—of Animal Planet fame—under the Alien Tort Statute for acts that amounted to piracy and that violated international agreements regulating conduct on the high seas. Though the district court denied the whalers a preliminary injunction and dismissed the whalers' piracy claim, the Ninth Circuit found in favor for the whalers. The case was reversed and instructed to be transferred to another district judge; Circuit Judge Smith dissented on the instruction to transfer. |
Case | |
| Institute of Marine Mammal Studies v. National Marine Fisheries Service | 23 F. Supp. 3d 705 (S.D. Miss. 2014), appeal dismissed (Feb. 27, 2015) | 2014 WL 2154348 | The Institute of Marine Mammal Studies (IMMS) brought action against the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and others, alleging that NMFS regulations did not properly implement the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), and that the NMFS was improperly administering placement list for rehabilitated sea lions that could not be reintroduced into the wild. Parties cross-moved for summary judgment. After considering the parties' arguments, the administrative record, and the relevant law, the District Court found that the IMMS lacked standing to bring its claim that NMFS regulations did not properly implement the Marine Mammal Protect Act ("MMPA"). Further, the Court found that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction of IMMS' claims that the NMFS was improperly administering a placement list for non-releasable sea lions. However, the Court found it may review the claims concerning the permit allowing IMMS to "take" sea lions. The Court found that a term included in IMMS' permit improperly delegated federal authority to third parties. The permit was therefore remanded to the agency for reconsideration. Each summary judgment motion was granted in part and denied in part. | Case | |
| Integrating Animal Interests into Our Legal System | David Favre | 10 Animal L. 87 (2004) |
This article explores the obstacles to obtaining legal rights for animals both within the animal rights movement and within the broader political context. The author examines in which arena legal change might best be sought--the courts, the legislature, state governments, or the federal government. Finally, it makes a number of suggestions as to what type of laws would be the most successful in advancing the interests of animals. |
Article | |
| Intentional Cruelty to Zoo Bears (China) | Song Wei | Animal Legal and Historical Web Center |
A short case study of what happened when an individual harmed several bears at a public zoo in China. |
Article | |
| Interlocutory Appeal No. 0059204-56.2020.8.16.0000 - Paraná, Brazil | Interlocutory Appeal No. 0059204-56.2020.8.16.0000 | In this case, the Justice Tribunal in Paraná, Brazil, unanimously overturned the lower court decision and ruled that two dogs, Rambo and Spike (appellants), had the legal capacity to be legal persons and, therefore, had standing to sue their owners, Pedro Rafael de Barros Escher and Elizabeth Merida Devai (Appellees) in a damages claim. Upon thorough examination of the validity of Decree-Law 24,645/1934, granting the Public Prosecutor's Office and animal protection entities the authority to act as legal representatives for animals, the court determined that the decree is an ordinary law (higher hierarchy than other laws), and was still in full force. As a result, animals in Brazil are explicitly endowed with the legal capacity to participate as parties in judicial proceedings by law. The judge referenced the 2005 case Suíça v. Gavazza, a groundbreaking decision where the chimpanzee, the subject of a Habeas Corpus, had passed away before the final judgment. The judge concluded that there is a discernible judicial trend towards accepting animals as legal persons with the ability to be a party in legal proceedings. Furthermore, the court stated that the Brazilian Constitution of 1988 established the principle of unobstructed access to justice, which means that every holder of substantive rights can be a party in a judicial proceeding; without this ability, such principle is ineffective and pointless. The appeal was granted, and the court ordered that Rambo and Spike maintain their role as the focal points of the lawsuit, acting as plaintiffs represented by the NGO. | Case | ||
| International Animal Rights: Specieism and Exclusionary Human Dignity | Kyle Ash | 11 Animal L. 195 (2005) |
The primary goal of this paper is to act as a heuristic device, to suggest an unconventional but practical perspective on the evolution of international law. Upon surveying discourse on the history of international law, texts of treaties, and declarations and writings of influential philosophers of law and morality, an antiquated perspective of humanity is apparent. A convention in international law, and a reflection of a common idea which feeds the foreboding trend of how humans relate to the planet, treats humanity as distinctively separate from the Earth’s biodiversity. Though environmental law is beginning to recognize the necessity of conserving biodiversity, a subjugating conceptualization of other species has inhibited the development, application, and legitimacy of the principle of sustainability. The belittling view of other species in relation to ourselves also creates inconsistencies within international law and undermines the integrity and sophistication of its development. International human rights law is especially affected. |
Article | |
| International Animal Welfare Promo |
|
Policy | |||
| International Comparative Animal Cruelty Laws (2003) | Paige Tomaselli |
Brief Summary of US-EU International Comparative Animal Cruelty Laws
|
Topical Introduction | ||
| International Convention for the Protection of Animals |
A proposed umbrella treaty to deal with all aspects of animal issues. Topics covered in the protocols include, transportation of animal, methods of taking wildlife, care of exhibited wildlife and protection from cruel treatment. |
Treaty |
