The Court of First Instance No. 1 of Badajoz has sentenced a Badajoz dog groomer to be compensated with 3,000 euros for “non-pecuniary damage” to the owner of a dog that disappeared after leaving it at the establishment to cut its hair, plus another 900 euros for the cost of the animal.
The events took place on May 7, 2019, when the applicant, Verónica G., took her Yorkshire dog named Moncho to a pet supply store to get her hair cut, and approximately an hour later, those responsible for the establishment called him “to tell him that the dog had escaped and they could not locate him.”
According to the sentence, to which Europa Press has had access, the animal has been missing since then, and its owner has not located it despite having carried out “numerous steps, including in different media, traveling to different places where they indicated that it could be found” and even offered a reward of 1,500 euros to whoever found it.
The hearing was held on March 16, 2021, and in the ruling, The judge considers that the disappearance of the dog caused its owner, with whom he had lived for eight years, a situation “of great anxiety and great emotional wear.”
Therefore, Verónica G. claimed both the owner of the establishment and the civil liability insurer, compensation for damages of 3,900 euros, of which 900 euros would correspond to the value attributed to the animal and 3,000 euros with non-material damage caused.
The hairdresser acknowledges the facts
The judge highlights in her sentence that the defendant does not dispute or the factss, that is, the loss of the dog owned by the plaintiff named Moncho on May 7, 2019, nor its responsibility for this fact occurred.
According to the version of those responsible for the establishment, the incident occurred when the dog was in a cage waiting to be treated, and “Just at the moment she was taken out with her harness and strap to begin the wash, she let go of the grippers and ran away“, at which time the door was open by the entrance of a client, through which the animal came out and its location was impossible.
For this reason, the defendant accepts its responsibility for the loss of the animal and offered its owner the payment of the amount of 900 euros for the cost of the animal, but he opposed the payment of 3,000 euros, since, as he argued, the psychological suffering of the woman was not proven and he advocates “avoiding any unjust enrichment.”
Regarding this petition for non-pecuniary damage, the judgment indicates that “Each person, depending on numerous factors, can have an affective bond of very different intensity with their pet”, so in case of loss of the animal, “the suffering, stress, anxiety that this fact produces can be of different entity”.
So, in this case, The judge estimates the compensation of 3,000 euros to the owner of Moncho, because “it is considered sufficiently accredited that” as a consequence of this fact, the applicant “suffered, and continues to suffer today, a situation of anxiety, pain, anguish and anxiety caused by the loss of her pet and by the uncertainty about what may have happened to her”.
The ruling recognizes the “important long-term emotional bonding with your dog.”, since she was considered a member of the family, whose disappearance had caused her “pain and anxiety that had an impact on her state of health”, hence the allegations of the defendants are not accepted, since “compensation for Non-pecuniary damage must be linked to the mental illness “of the animal’s owner.
Eddie is an Australian news reporter with over 9 years in the industry and has published on Forbes and tech crunch.