Best interest of a dog, Mink Breeders contest phasing out, and a strata fight over a deck

Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan

This week on Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan:
A dispute over the adoption of a dog named Maddie ended up in court after the woman who “rescued” and sold her tried to get her puppies back to sell.
The dispute involved a woman in Port Alberni who has a business selling dogs that the judge concluded was misrepresented to be a registered non-profit organization called Ziggy’s Rescue.
A family purchased Maddie from the woman for $600 and signed a document entitled Foster and Adoption Contract.
The contract specified that Maddie needed to be spayed, but it turned out she was pregnant, so this wasn’t possible until the puppies were born.
When the woman who was operating Ziggy’s Rescue found out that Maddie was pregnant, she insisted that she get the puppies because she wished to sell them. The woman showed up at the home of the family that purchased Maddie and was screaming, “puppy thieves,” called the police, and yelled, “we will bury you” at the family.
The woman operating Ziggy’s Rescue ultimately sued the family in small claims court, seeking $5,000 in “lost revenue” and to get Maddie back.
The judge hearing the case, concluded that the woman operating Ziggy’s Rescue was not a reliable witness. He found that she had misrepresented that she was operating a non-profit organization when she was operating a business. The judge asked the woman if she declared her income, and she responded, “not at this time,” and that “we will get caught up.”
The judge concluded that various terms in the Foster and Adoption Contract were unreasonable and unenforceable. He also concluded that Maddie’s best interest should be a consideration when interpreting the contract on the basis that “we need to recognize that dogs, and other pets, are not simply “things” like a chair or a car.”
The judge concluded that “The time has come for Maddie to finally know she is in her forever home and that the defendant’s family are made whole.”
Also, on the show, a case involving BC Mink Breeders is discussed. In 2021 the BC government decided that mink farming should be phased out in the province by 2025 based on the risk they pose to public health. There was evidence that mink could catch and transmit COVID-19 and a concern that this could result in a dangerous mutation of the virus.
The Mink Breeders are challenging the decision, alleging that it was unreasonable. To do so, they are seeking access to the evidence considered by the provincial cabinet. The provincial government did not want to disclose this information.
The judge hearing the case concluded that while the concept of public interest immunity can be used to keep sensitive and confidential documents secret, it was not absolute. As a result, the government has been ordered to provide an affidavit detailing what documents it wished to keep secret and on what basis public interest immunity was being claimed for each of them so that the judge can decide what should be disclosed.
Finally, on the show, a case involving a small strata corporation and permission to cross a deck to get to a set of stairs leading to a backyard is discussed.
Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.