Proceeding contribution from Stephen Crabb (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Friday, 14 March 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Animals Act 1971 (Amendment) Bill.
Animals Act 1971 (Amendment) Bill
The hon. Gentleman seems content with the law as it has been since the case of Mirvahedy. Yet in the case mentioned by the hon. Member for Ealing, North, the victim was not compensated because the law was not sufficient to provide the protection. The law is unclear; that is the whole point of this discussion. We are not talking about claims that go along the negligence route, but about where strict liability does and does not apply.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 473 c553
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Animals Damage Liability Horse riding Insurance Horses Rural areas Urban areas
- Legislation
- Animals Act 1971 (Amendment) Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 02:09:39 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455436
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455436
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455436