Court orders pet hotel to return dog held 11 months ago for debt

The Court of Appeals of Puerto Montt accepted an appeal for protection of the owner of a dog and ordered the Sociedad de Profesionales Austral Limitada to hand over the pet held in its clinic for debt incurred for canine hotel services, since last October to date.

In the unanimous ruling, the Second Chamber of the appeal court – made up of the ministers Jorge Pizarro Astudillo, Ivonne Avendaño Gómez and the lawyer (i) María Herna Oyarzún Miranda – gave a period of three days for the clinic to deliver the animal to the owner.

According to the resolution, the action of the clinic left the appellant “in a precarious situation, who has been prevented from exercising the powers inherent to the domain over her dog Rocco.”

The ruling adds that the debt for canine hotel services is a “conflict that must be aired in the corresponding jurisdictional headquarters through the exercise of the pertinent actions” in the ordinary courts of Justice.

It also states that “it should be taken into special consideration that beyond our civil legislation considering animals as objects of rights, whose ownership rests with the human being, for example the right of ownership, it is no less true that national legislation tends each once again to the protection of those, from mistreatment and abuse, especially of pets and animals, as is the case of the dog Rocco ”.

“In this sense, it is relevant to note that with the enactment of Law 21.020, it seeks, among other objectives, to protect the health and animal welfare of pets and companion animals through responsible ownership, an issue that the plaintiff precisely sought to fulfill by leaving to the care of those who resorted to their pet Rocco, when he carried out work at home, and having previously registered Rocco with the competent authority, he delegated his care to the respondent, forcing the latter to provide him with food, shelter and good treatment, and provide him with care veterinarians essential for their well-being ”, he adds.

“The aforementioned, that is, the respondent has complied with providing shelter and good treatment to Rocco, it cannot be an excuse for not returning it to its legitimate owner, when she has requested it, for a pending debt, especially if it is her pet. and pet ”, he emphasizes.

Therefore, it is resolved that the appeal is accepted, “and the respondent must proceed to deliver material to the plaintiff of the dog Rocco, within a third day, under warning of applying any of the sanctions contemplated in Act No. 94-2015 in this regard. ”.

–