Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 90

Thread: Ontario wild boar hunt gone bad

  1. #61
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishermccann View Post
    Well I feel, and I bet others do to, that more than a trespassing ticket is warranted in this instance. They are neighbors for gosh sake, I remember a story of a barn burning down for much less.
    Agreed.... this is a classic example why there should be more teeth put into the trespassing laws...not long ago, some guy was fined $750.00 for camping longer than 21 days on crown land....trespass and kill family pets gets you a $100.00 fine !!!!! Unreal !!

  2. # ADS
    Advertisement
    ADVERTISEMENT
     

  3. #62
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkB View Post
    It wouldn't be the value of the pigs I'd be suing for. They are pets, part of the family, emotional distress, etc. That's worth a lot more.
    Emotional distress law suits will only make lawyers rich. In Ontario civil courts,emotional distress is never part of the equation. Even punitive damages are a rarity. We may only sue for the actual value of the item lost plus reasonable expenses. Obtaining a judgement is one thing,actually collecting is a whole different matter.
    Society needs to stop bending to the will of the delusional.

  4. #63
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Trim in this case, are you saying the couple should only get the price per pound for pork? That seems harsh, they were emotionally attached to their pets.

  5. #64
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishermccann View Post
    Trim in this case, are you saying the couple should only get the price per pound for pork? That seems harsh, they were emotionally attached to their pets.
    It is absolutely harsh,but,that's all a court can do. A Judge has to take the emotion out of it and rule in the cold,hard light of day. Livestock is merely a commodity that was lost,therefore,only the real cost is recoverable. The shooter offered $1K in compensation. The victims should have taken the money. I doubt they'll do that well in small claims court.
    Society needs to stop bending to the will of the delusional.

  6. #65
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkB View Post
    It wouldn't be the value of the pigs I'd be suing for. They are pets, part of the family, emotional distress, etc. That's worth a lot more.
    That's not the way civil courts work in Canada.

  7. #66
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fox View Post
    So Werner, someone comes on to your property without your permission and shoots 2 of your hounds, how about $1000, sounds about right, they are not worth that anyway.

    See the problem here?
    The cost you can recover in a civil court is generally the economic worth, not their emotional worth to you.
    So I'd still be upset about the loss of the dogs.
    But if I could replace them for $1000 - from civil court perspective its a fair settlement

    I really don't understand why we have all these posts offering opinions when they do not have a clue how civil courts work in Canada.
    Too many people watching too much American TV I guess.

  8. #67
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Yes lots are saying what the rules are, but do you agree with them? Should a pet NOT be worth more than the cost to replace them? When a neighbor broke the law to kill them? Imagine seeing the person daily and living next door to the person who broke the law to shoot your pet. As in another long ago post can anyone say ' spontaneous combustion'.
    Last edited by fishermccann; December 2nd, 2017 at 11:53 AM.

  9. #68
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by werner.reiche View Post
    The cost you can recover in a civil court is generally the economic worth, not their emotional worth to you.
    So I'd still be upset about the loss of the dogs.
    But if I could replace them for $1000 - from civil court perspective its a fair settlement

    I really don't understand why we have all these posts offering opinions when they do not have a clue how civil courts work in Canada.
    Too many people watching too much American TV I guess.
    A lot of people think that way . They think it's a get rich quick way of thinking.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

  10. #69
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishfood View Post
    A lot of people think that way . They think it's a get rich quick way of thinking.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    Maybe they want the penalty for such an egregious action to be more than a trespassing fine. As I feel it should be.

  11. #70
    Has too much time on their hands

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trimmer21 View Post
    Emotional distress law suits will only make lawyers rich. In Ontario civil courts,emotional distress is never part of the equation. Even punitive damages are a rarity. We may only sue for the actual value of the item lost plus reasonable expenses. Obtaining a judgement is one thing,actually collecting is a whole different matter.
    Trimmer21,

    My wife was involved in a fatal car accident. She survived and the other driver did not. We were sued for civil damages and they were seeking some of the money for emotional distress. Insurance company ended up settling. So your statement isn't exactly true.

    Dyth
    Last edited by Dythbringer; December 4th, 2017 at 09:09 AM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •