Responsibility of the owner of farm animals

When considering cases involving claims by vehicle owners against animal owners for compensation for damage caused as a result of an accident involving farm animals, the courts in some cases incorrectly apply the provisions of Article 931 of the Civil Code, classifying farm animals as IPOs.

Courts should keep in mind that the IPO is a vehicle and Article 931 of the Civil Code establishes the increased responsibility of its owner, therefore, the exception to the liability of the IPO owner is the unlawful, culpable actions of the owner of the animal, which are causally related to the accident.

The liability of the owner of the vehicle is subject to compulsory insurance, whereas the current legislation does not provide for compulsory liability insurance for the owner of an agricultural animal.

In order to establish the responsibility of the owner of an agricultural animal for causing harm as a result of an accident, it is necessary to establish the fact that he violated the Rules of grazing farm animals on public lands, in the right-of-way of railways and highways, the boundaries of water protection strips and sanitary protection zones.

The rules of grazing farm animals are regulated by the Standard Rules approved by the Order of the Minister of Agriculture of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated April 29, 2020 No. 145, as well as the Rules of grazing approved by the decisions of the regional maslikhats.

From the certificates, the owners of regional courts can see that farm animals are often brought to administrative responsibility under part 2 of Article 408 of the Administrative Code, that is, violation of the rules for grazing farm animals established by local representative bodies of regions, cities of republican significance, and the capital, resulting in damage to the property of individuals.

However, the administrative offense provided for in part 2 of Article 408 of the Administrative Code refers to violations in the field of state veterinary and sanitary control and supervision, that is, for grazing sick farm animals (including those infected with infectious diseases).;

grazing of farm animals that have not undergone mandatory veterinary procedures (including vaccination).

It is correct to involve animal owners for violating the Grazing Rules provided for in paragraphs 3), 7) and 8) of paragraph 6 of the Grazing Rules, namely for:

- grazing of farm animals on public lands, in right-of-way of railways and highways, borders of water protection strips and zones of sanitary protection;

- driving of farm animals across railway tracks and roads outside specially designated areas, as well as at night and in conditions of insufficient visibility (except for slaughterhouses at different levels);

- driving of farm animals along roads with asphalt and cement-concrete pavement, if there are other ways. Liability for violation of the specified provisions of the Grazing Rules is provided for in Part 2 of Article 633 of the Administrative Code, that is, violations of grazing rules that caused traffic accidents with minor bodily injury to people, damage to vehicles or other property.

At the same time, in itself, bringing the owner of the animal to administrative responsibility under Article 408 of part 2 of the Administrative Code is not a reason to dismiss the claim if the circumstances of the accident have been fully established by the police, and therefore it can be concluded that there are culprits, illegal actions of the owner of the animal, which are causally related to the incident. Traffic accident.

By a resolution of the Judicial Board for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 19, 2023, P.V.'s claim against T.B. for compensation of material damage and recovery of compensation for moral damage was denied.

It follows from the case file that on the evening of August 9, 2021, the spouses of P., who live in the village of Turgenevka, were visited by the spouses of L., who live in the city of Zhitikara.

At about 01:00 on August 10, 2021, at the suggestion of the guests, the spouses P. and L. with three minor children decided to go to the city of Gitikara.

Due to the fact that P. was drinking beer, L.V. got behind the wheel of the car, while P.V. did not fasten her seat belt.

While driving along the Turgenevka-Zhitikara highway, an accident occurred involving P.V.'s car and two horses belonging to T.B..

As a result of the accident, the car was damaged, the passengers P.V. and P.N. were injured, and the horses died.

By the decision of the Zhitikarinsky District Court of Kostanay region dated December 6, 2021, L.V. was brought to administrative responsibility under part 2 of Article 611 of the Administrative Code upon leaving the scene of an accident. On September 9, 2021, a protocol on an administrative offense was drawn up against T.K. (T.B.'s brother) under part 2 of Article 408 of the Administrative Code for violating the rules of grazing farm animals.

In satisfying P.V.'s claims for compensation for material damage, recovery of compensation for moral damage, and rejecting T.B.'s counterclaim for compensation for material damage, the courts of first and appellate instances referred to Articles 931, 935, 951 of the Civil Code, classifying the horse as an IPO.

The Board of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan indicated that in this case the IPO is P.V.'s car, owned by T.B. the horse, as an agricultural animal, does not belong to such.

The basis for excluding the liability of the owner of the IPO P.V. is to establish the unlawful, culpable actions of the owner of the animal, which are causally related to the accident.

At the same time, the civil legislation does not contain rules on the distribution of responsibility between the owner of the vehicle and the owner of livestock in case of an accident.

In cases where police authorities bring animal owners to administrative responsibility under Article 408 of the Administrative Code, the courts have the right to establish the circumstances of an accident in a general manner, including checking the actions of the owner of the vehicle for compliance with traffic regulations.

At the same time, take into account the provisions of paragraph 2 of paragraph 26 of the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 6, 2017 No. 7 "On certain issues of the application by courts of the norms of the Special Part of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offenses".

In accordance with this paragraph, if a traffic accident that resulted in the death of livestock and pets took place outside the area of the warning road signs 1.24 "Cattle crossing" in the absence of a violation of the speed limit and other provisions of the Traffic Rules, the driver of the vehicle is not subject to administrative liability under the first part of Article 610 of the Administrative Code.

The immediate cause of a traffic accident in such circumstances is the failure of the livestock owner to fulfill the duty of animal supervision, which is assigned to him by subparagraph 1) paragraph 12 of section 24 of the Traffic Rules, which, depending on the circumstances, entails liability under part two of Article 615 or part two of Article 633 of the Administrative Code.

It follows from the content of this rule that the cattle owner is subject to administrative liability under the following conditions: - committing an accident outside the area of the "Cattle crossing" warning sign; - no violation by the driver of the vehicle of the speed limit and other provisions of traffic regulations.

Jurisdiction of cases

The jurisdiction of cases is determined in accordance with the general rules established by Article 29 of the CPC, that is, at the place of residence of the defendant of an individual or at the location of the defendant of a legal entity.    

Along with this, claims for compensation for damage caused by injury or other damage to health, as well as caused by the death of the breadwinner, may be filed by the plaintiff at his place of residence or at the place of injury (part 5 of Article 30 of the CPC).

State duty

According to paragraph 1 of Article 610 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Taxes and Other Mandatory Payments to the Budget" (Tax Code), a state fee is charged in the following amounts from claims for material damage filed in court: for individuals - 1 percent of the amount of the claim, but not more than 10,000 MCI, for legal entities - 3 a percentage of the claim amount, but not more than 20,000 MCI, from non-property claims - 0.5 MCI.

Plaintiffs in claims for compensation for damage caused by injury or other damage to health, as well as the death of the breadwinner, are exempt from paying state duty on the basis of subparagraph 5) of Article 616 of the Tax Code.

The legislation does not provide for pre-trial settlement

Courts should keep in mind that the legislation does not provide for the plaintiff's compliance with the procedure for pre-trial settlement of disputes on compensation for damage caused by a source of increased danger (hereinafter referred to as IPO).

Example: By the ruling of the Alatau District Court of Almaty dated April 5, 2023, the claim of N.D. to K.K. and Zh.E. for recovery of material damage caused by IPO in connection with non-compliance with the procedure for pre-trial settlement of the dispute was dismissed.

In accordance with subparagraph 1) of Article 279 of the CPC RK, the court leaves the claim without consideration if the plaintiff has not complied with the procedure established by law for this category of cases or the procedure provided for in the contract for pre-trial dispute settlement and the possibility of applying this procedure has not been lost.

If the law establishes or the contract provides for a pre-trial dispute settlement procedure for a certain category of cases, an appeal to the court may be after observing this procedure (part 6 of Article 8 of the CPC RK).

Taking into account these norms, by the ruling of the judicial board for Civil Cases of the Almaty City Court dated May 18, 2023, the ruling of the court of first instance was canceled, with the transfer of the case to the court of first instance for consideration on the merits.

The plaintiffs are citizens and legal entities.

In accordance with Part 1 of Article 47 of the CPC RK, plaintiffs are citizens and legal entities who have filed a claim in defense of their violated or disputed rights and freedoms, legitimate interests, or in whose defense a claim has been filed by other persons in accordance with the procedure provided for by this Code.

Determination of the defendant in a claim for damages

When determining the defendant in a claim for damages, it is necessary to check the legal grounds for the defendant's ownership of IPO property.

M.E. filed a lawsuit against B.E., K. for recovery of material damage and monetary compensation for moral damage caused as a result of the accident.

By the decision of the Borodulikhinsky district Court of the Abai region dated January 12, 2023, the claim was partially satisfied, material damage in the amount of 852,459 tenge was recovered from B.E. in favor of M.E., monetary compensation for moral damage in the amount of 1,200,000 tenge.

The court found that the Lada 21713 car belongs to the defendant K.A., the defendant B.E. drove the vehicle on the basis of an insurance policy.

By the verdict of the court No. 2 of the city of Semey, East Kazakhstan region, dated December 21, 2021, B.E. was found guilty of committing a criminal offense under part 2 of Article 345 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, which established that B.E., driving a Lada 21713 motor vehicle, made a head-on collision with a Toyota Avensis motor vehicle.

As a result of the accident, M.E. suffered serious harm to her health.

Based on paragraph 1 of Article 931 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, B.E., who was legally driving the vehicle, was reasonably recognized as the owner of the Lada 21713 vehicle at the time of the accident.

The presence of an insurance policy indicates the insurance of the defendant's GPO as the owner of the vehicle.

 Regulatory and legal framework

The normative legal acts regulating these legal relations and subject to application in the consideration of cases of the analyzed category are:

- The Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan;

- The Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code);

- The Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter - CPC);

- The Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Administrative Offenses" (hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Code);

- The Labor Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the Labor Code),

- The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On compulsory insurance of civil liability of vehicle owners";

- The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On compulsory insurance of civil liability of the carrier to passengers";

- The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Road Traffic" dated April 17, 2014;

- Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 6, 2017 No. 8 "On Judicial practice in disputes arising from insurance contracts";

- Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 27, 2015 No. 7 "On the application by courts of legislation on compensation for moral damage";

- Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 9, 1999 No. 9 "On certain issues of application by courts of the Republic of legislation on compensation for damage caused to health";

- Rules for determining the amount of damage caused to a vehicle, approved by Resolution No. 14 of the Board of the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated January 28, 2016;

- Order of the Minister of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated June 30, 2023 No. 534 "On approval of the Rules of the Road, the Basic provisions for the admission of vehicles to operation, the list of operational and special services, the transport of which is subject to equipment with special light and sound signals and coloring according to special color schemes";

- Standard Rules for keeping and walking pets, approved by Order No. 168 of the Minister of Ecology, Geology and Natural Resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated May 20, 2022; - Standard Rules for grazing farm Animals, approved by Order No. 145 of the Minister of Agriculture of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated April 29, 2020.

Attention!   

       Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.  

 For more information,  please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085. 

Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office  Court Cases