Competitions, training, recreational activities, hippotherapy, historical reenactments – these and many other events share the fact that they involve close and direct contact between animals and humans. Incidents involving horses that cause harm to a person’s health or life are part of the inherent risk of this sport. Similarly, damage to a person’s property also constitutes part of this risk. But who should bear liability for damage caused by a horse? To whom should the injured party direct claims for compensation for such damage?
Damage caused by a horse – who is responsible for repairing the damage?
Each time, the starting point for consideration of the obligation to repair damage caused by an animal (in this case, a horse) will be Article 431 of the Civil Code of April 23, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as “Civil Code” or “C.C.”).
§ 1. Whoever keeps or uses an animal is obliged to repair the damage caused by it, regardless of whether it was under their supervision or strayed or escaped, unless neither they nor the person for whom they are responsible are at fault.
§ 2. Even if the person keeping or using the animal is not responsible under the provisions of the preceding paragraph, the injured party may demand full or partial compensation for the damage if, from the circumstances, especially when comparing the financial situation of the injured party and that person, it follows that it is required by the principles of social coexistence.
– Article 431 of the Civil Code.
According to § 1 of Article 431 C.C., the person who keeps the horse is responsible for repairing the damage caused by it. The person using the horse will also be liable. M. Załucki emphasizes that, from the perspective of liability for damage, the legal title to the animal is of little importance.1 Regardless of this stance, in practice, the ownership aspect will often dictate to whom the injured party will address their claim.
To claim compensation for damage caused by the behavior of the horse, it must be proven that:
- the recipient of the claim keeps or uses the animal;
- the damage caused is related to the behavior of the animal;
- there is a direct causal relationship between the damage and the event causing the damage.
Keeping a horse vs. using a horse – what’s the difference in the context of liability for damage?
According to the applicable regulations, we know who is generally liable for damage caused by the behavior of a horse. It is important to distinguish between the person who is keeping the animal and the one using it. Keeping a horse means providing care for it for a certain period. This care should be in one’s own interest and involves providing food and shelter for the animal. Such actions should be noticeable to those around.
[…] a person who takes care of an animal should be understood as anyone who has custody of the animal for a certain period (not just occasionally or sporadically) and does so for their own benefit (even if not necessarily for material gain), which is noticeable to the environment primarily because the person provides food and shelter for the animal. The animal’s owner is primarily considered the keeper. A person who has temporary custody of the animal will not be held responsible under Article 431 C.C., as they do not do so for their own benefit.
Judgment of the District Court in Łódź – Civil Appeal Division, May 22, 2023, case no. III Ca 1620/22.
Using the animal, on the other hand, means utilizing it for one’s own purposes without the necessity of permanent care or using the animal occasionally, occasionally, or for a one-time purpose2.
According to Article 431 § 1 C.C., those who use the animal include an employer who employs an employee who, in the course of their duties and in the employer’s interest, directly uses the animal.
Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Szczecin – Civil Division, June 2, 2016, case no. I ACa 17/16.
Therefore, the party responsible for damage caused by the horse should be either the person who keeps the horse or uses it. In practice, this is most often the stable owner, the person to whom the horse belongs, or the one who exercises continuous supervision over it.
Who should not be liable for damage caused by a horse?
It is reasonable to ask who should not be liable for damage caused by a horse. For example, what about the employee – a trainer, during whose lessons a nervous movement of the horse caused a child to be thrown off the saddle? The legislator directly indicates the responsibility of those who keep or use the animal. In this context, it is worth citing the judgment of the District Court in Kielce, which states:
Persons whose duty it is to care for the animal only as part of their job duties should be excluded from the group of entities liable for damage under Article 431 C.C.; […] persons storing the animal; a veterinarian who treats the animal for the duration of its treatment; a person who accepted someone else’s animal (e.g., a horse) for training purposes; a carrier; and a person managing another’s affairs without authorization.
Judgment of the District Court in Kielce – Civil Appeal Division, November 10, 2016, case no. II Ca 958/16.
Liability under Article 431 § 1 C.C. is based on “fault in supervision.” This means that the recipient of the claim is responsible, regardless of whether the animal was under their direct supervision. This responsibility also applies when the supervision was carried out by an employee. A potential defendant can avoid liability, but they must prove that the supervision was properly conducted. They must also show that the incident did not result from a fault in supervision.
Author: Witold Łukasik – lawyer
If you need help, please contact me
If you have any questions related to the content published on the blog or are seeking information on topics not previously covered there, which, in your opinion, are worth elaborating on, or if you need legal support in your individual case, I encourage you to contact me by filling out the registration form.