BCSPCA v Sudweeks et al., 2002 BCCA 493 (CanLII)

The defendants had been ordered to pay the costs of care of 30 horses and seven dogs seized and taken into custody by the BCSPCA. The defendantds seek an order staying execution of that order until their appeal is heard. This order would only be appropriate if there is a reasonable possibility of success on appeal.

The defendants put forth three grounds of appeal – all come to allegations of errors in findings of fact. They argue that the trial judge erred in her finding that the manager of the Society was an “authorized agent”; that the trial judge ignored the defendant’s submission that the plaintiff had not fulfilled the second condition for a lawful seizure; and that the trial judge erred in placing the onus on the defendants to establish their ownership of the horses and dogs. The judge finds that there is no reasonable possibility that a court would accede to any of these grounds of appeal. Therefore, the application for a stay of execution is dismissed.

The defendant also seeks leave to appeal. The court finds that leave is not required because it is an appeal from a final order following a summary trial under Rule 18A.

With regard to continuing costs of care, the judge indicates that if there are further costs of care after the date of judgment of the trial judge it is for the Society to seek them in whatever way they may be advised.

Source: Case Law

Jurisdiction: British Columbia

Topics: appealapplicationcostscosts of caredogshorsesreasonable possibility of success on appealSPCAstay of execution

Report a Broken Link