Results
Title |
Author | Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ley Federal de Responsabilidad Ambiental | Ley Federal de Responsabilidad Ambiental | This law governs environmental responsibility arising from environmental harm and addresses the legal damages and consequences resulting from such harm. It recognizes damages caused to the environment regardless of the damages caused to the owner of the land and the natural resources. | Statute | ||
| Ley General de Pesca y Acuacultura Sustentables | Ley General de Pesca y Acuacultura Sustentables | This law aims to regulate, encourage, and manage the use of fishing and aquaculture resources in the national territory and the areas over which the nation exercises its sovereignty and jurisdiction. | Statute | ||
| Ley N° 371 de 2023 | Law 371, 2023 | Law 371, 2023 | Ley 371, enacted in March 2023, is the law by which Panama promotes the conservation and protection of Sea Turtles and their habitat. Relying on Law 287, 2022 (which recognized Nature as a subject of Rights), this law recognizes sea turtles are subjects of rights in Panama. More specifically, Article 29, "Protection of the Rights of Turtles and their Habitat," establishes that sea turtles have "the right to live and have free passage in a healthy environment, free of pollution and other anthropocentric impacts that cause physical damage and damage to their health, such as climate change, contamination incidental capture, coastal development, and unregulated tourism, among others." | Statute | |
| LEY Nº 27596, 2001- Peru | Law 27596 establishes regulations regarding the breeding, training, commercialization, possession, and transfer of potentially dangerous dogs for the purpose of protecting people's integrity, health, and tranquility. The law prohibits encouraging any form of canine aggression and makes special reference to dog fighting. In general, owners of potentially dangerous dogs must be competent and physically capable of caring for the dog, including providing them with appropriate training. In the event of a stray, the dog must be taken in by the municipality whose jurisdiction it is within and reinserted into the community through animal care programs, so long as it is not deemed aggressive. The law also describes the procedure for how to handle a dog that attacks another living being or kills an animal, and the corresponding consequences of such events. Lastly, the law states regulations for handling dogs with grave diseases that could be transmitted to human beings. | Statute | |||
| LEY Nº 27596, 2001- Peru | La Ley 27596 regula la crianza, adiestramiento, comercialización, tenencia y traslado de perros potencialmente peligrosos, con el fin de proteger la integridad, salud y tranquilidad de las personas. La ley prohíbe fomentar cualquier forma de agresión canina y hace especial referencia a las peleas de perros. En general, los propietarios de perros potencialmente peligrosos deben ser competentes y estar físicamente capacitados para cuidar del perro, lo que incluye proporcionarles un adiestramiento adecuado. En caso de perro callejero, el perro debe ser acogido por el municipio en cuya jurisdicción se encuentre y reinsertado en la comunidad mediante programas de atención a los animales, siempre que no se considere agresivo. La ley también describe el procedimiento para tratar a un perro que ataque a otro ser vivo o mate a un animal, y las correspondientes consecuencias de tales sucesos. Por último, la ley establece normas para el manejo de perros con enfermedades graves que puedan transmitirse a los seres humanos. | Statute | |||
| Ley Nº 31807, 2023 - Peru | This law amends Law 30407, Animal Protection and Welfare Law, to incorporate the adoption and identification of companion animals. | Statute | |||
| Ley Nº 31807, 2023 - Peru | Esta ley, aprobada en junio de 2023, describe una modificación a la ley 30407 para incluir normas relativas a la adopción de mascotas abandonadas y entregadas, o animales adoptados para ser de compañía. El objeto de esta modificación es ampliar la protección de los animales de compañía y garantizar su bienestar. | Statute | |||
| LIBERATING ANIMAL LAW: BREAKING FREE FROM HUMAN-USE TYPOLOGIES | Jessica Eisen | 17 Animal L. 59 (2010) |
Animal protection laws have traditionally categorized animals according to the manner in which humans use them. Animals have been categorized as companion animals, animals used in medical testing, animals raised for slaughter, and wildlife, and the protection afforded to animals has been ostensibly commensurate to their use categorization. This Article focuses on two alternative strategies that provide legal protection for animals without relying on human use as their primary mode of categorization. First, the Article looks at protecting animals as a single category, in particular through the use of constitutional provisions. The Article then looks at a species-based model that seeks to extend some traditional “human rights” to Great Apes. Ultimately, the Article concludes that the species-based model provides a more effective alternative to the use-based model, since it provides an alternate means of categorization that shifts focus to the needs and capacities of animals. While generalized protection at the constitutional level may be rhetorically effective, it does not offer an alternative form of legal category that would allow for precision in legal rule-making. |
Article | |
| Liberty Humane Soc., Inc. v. Jacobs | Not Reported in A.2d, 2008 WL 2491961 (N.J.Super.A.D.) | This case concerns the authority of the Department of Health to revoke certifications of animal control officers who willfully contravened the state law on impounding dogs. The court found that “[s] ince the Department acknowledged that it is charged with revoking certifications of animal control off icers when those officers pose ‘ a threat to the health and safety’ of the community, it should follow that allegations of officers willfully and illegally taking a dog from its owner and falsifying records to claim it a stray so as to expose it to adoption by another or euthanasia calls for the Department to take action. ” It would be both arbitrary and capricious for the Department to ignore its duty to determine if revocation of certification is required. | Case | ||
| Lieberman v. Powers | 873 N.E.2d 803 (Mass.App.Ct., 2007) | 70 Mass.App.Ct. 238 (2007), 2007 WL 2768668 (Mass.App.Ct.) |
In this Massachusetts case, Noah Lieberman sustained injuries when he was scratched and bitten by a cat while visiting a “cat lounge” at the Sheldon branch animal shelter, which was operated by the Animal Rescue League of Boston (ARL). Plaintiff alleged that his injuries resulted from the defendants' negligent design and maintenance of the cat lounge. The Appeals Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk reversed the lower court's grant of summary judgment for defendants. Specifically, the court found that the plaintiff has provided sufficient evidence, in the form of expert opinion, that an ordinarily prudent person in the circumstances of this case-which include the defendants' knowledge regarding the behavior (and potential for aggression) of cats-would have taken additional steps to ensure the safety of visitors to the cat lounge. At the very least, the defendants should have foreseen that the small size of the room, as well as the set-up (one food bowl, one litter box, two perches) and unsupervised operation of the cat lounge was such that it was more likely than not to increase stress in cats, which in turn made it more likely than not that the cats would behave aggressively. |
Case |