Sandy checks the forecast and smiles. The air feels lighter than it has in weeks. She clips a small red harness onto Fido, her miniature pinscher, who spins in tight circles by the door, nails clicking on the tile. She tucks a roll of poop bags into her pocket, loops the leash around her wrist, and steps outside into the afternoon.
The trail behind her house is quiet. Sandy walks at an easy pace, letting Fido trot ahead, his ears alert, nose low to the ground.
Ahead, about a hundred metres down the path, Sandy notices another dog and owner approaching from the opposite direction. The dog is much larger. A muscular pit bull with a thick chest and a broad head. His name, Sandy later learns, is Dozer.
At first, everything seems fine. Both dogs notice each other. Their heads lift. Their bodies tense. Fido’s leash tightens as he strains forward. Dozer mirrors the energy, pulling against his owner’s grip. Sandy slows, tightening her hold on the leash.
As the distance between them closes, the excitement escalates. The barking becomes louder, faster. The dogs lunge toward each other in a sudden blur of movement. Sandy feels the jolt through her arm as Fido yanks forward.
And then it happens.
Dozer breaks past his owner’s control. In a split second, his jaws clamp down on Fido’s leg. The sound is sharp and horrifying, a mix of yelps and snarls. Sandy screams and instinctively reaches in, trying to pull the dogs apart. Dozer thrashes, teeth flashing. Fido cries out again.
Dozer’s teeth catch Sandy’s hand. Pain explodes across her fingers. She stumbles backward, losing her footing, and Dozer snaps again, this time grazing her face. Blood pours down her cheek. Someone is yelling. The leash burns her palm. Finally, Dozer is pulled away.
The trail goes quiet again, except for Fido’s whimpering and Sandy’s shaking breath.
This article explains what Ontario law says about incidents like this, who is legally responsible, and what claims arise when dogs injure people and other animals.
The Legal Framework: The Dog Owners’ Liability Act
Dog bite and dog attack cases in Ontario are governed primarily by the Dog Owners’ Liability Act, RSO 1990, c D.16. While the name of the Act sounds more like it came out of a children’s Saturday morning cartoon, the Act itself does a great job of outlining the liability structure in dog bite incidents.
At its core, the Dog Owners’ Liability Act imposes strict liability on dog owners. Section 2(1) states:
“The owner of a dog is liable for damages resulting from a bite or attack by the dog on another person or domestic animal.”
This language is deliberate. Unlike ordinary negligence claims, the injured person does not have to prove that the dog owner acted carelessly. The law does not require proof that the dog was aggressive before, poorly trained, or inadequately restrained. Section 2(3) states:
“The liability of the owner does not depend upon knowledge of the propensity of the dog or fault or negligence on the part of the owner, but the court shall reduce the damages awarded in proportion to the degree, if any, to which the fault or negligence of the plaintiff caused or contributed to the damages.”
If a dog bites or attacks and causes damage, the owner is legally responsible.
Sandy’s Legal Claim
In Sandy’s case, there are two distinct categories of loss: her own physical injuries, and the injuries suffered by Fido.
Sandy has a clear claim for the lacerations to her hand and face.
Under section 2(1) of the Dog Owners’ Liability Act, Dozer’s owner is liable for damages resulting from the bite. Sandy does not need to prove the owner lost control intentionally or carelessly. The focus is on ownership of the dog and injury suffered.
Her claim may include compensation for:
- pain and suffering
- scarring and disfigurement
- psychological trauma, including anxiety or fear around dogs
- income loss if her injuries interfere with work
- medical expenses not covered by OHIP
- Loss of housekeeping and home maintenance
- and other possible claims, for instance, Sandy’s family members could bring a claim if they suffer a loss of care, guidance, or companionship as a result of Sandy’s injuries.
Facial injuries, scarring, visibility, and long‑term psychological impact all factor into damage assessment.
The Claim for Fido’s Broken Leg
The Dog Owners’ Liability Act extends beyond human injury.
Section 2(1) explicitly includes damage to a “domestic animal.” As such, Fido qualifies.
Sandy may advance a claim for veterinary expenses, rehabilitation costs, and related losses arising from Fido’s injured leg. However, it is important to note that pets are treated as property under Ontario law. While claims for veterinary care are valid, the pain and suffering suffered by Fido, is not a recognized category under which we can seek compensation. Courts only recognize the financial burden of veterinary care, especially where surgical intervention is required.
The key point is this: Liability flows from the attack itself.
Hold on, Dozer is a Pit Bull…
Dozer’s breed also matters under Ontario law. The Dog Owners’ Liability Act contains specific provisions dealing with pit bulls.
- Section 1 of the Act defines a “pit bull” broadly to include pit bull terriers, Staffordshire bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American pit bull terriers, and dogs with physical characteristics substantially similar to those breeds.
- Section 6 of the Dog Owners’ Liability Act states plainly: “No person shall own a pit bull.”
- Sections 7 and 8 of the Act carve out narrow exceptions for pit bulls that were lawfully owned in Ontario before the ban came into force. These dogs are referred to as “restricted pit bulls.”
Where a dog is found to be a pit bull, the Act imposes enhanced controls, including strict restrictions on ownership and detailed requirements for leashing and muzzling in public.
Importantly, however, pit bull classification does not alter the civil liability analysis for a bite or attack. Section 2(1) of the Act still applies in full. In other words, Dozer’s classification as a pit bull may carry regulatory and enforcement consequences, but Sandy’s right to recover compensation for her injuries and for Fido’s injuries arises from the attack itself, not from the breed label.
Can Liability Be Reduced?
The Dog Owners’ Liability Act is strict, but not absolute. Section 2(3) provides: “… the court shall reduce the damages awarded …[if] the plaintiff caused or contributed to the damages”.
In other words, courts assess contributory negligence. If Sandy provoked Dozer, or if there was deliberate interference, or if she was ignoring explicit warnings, then that may reduce the overall claim. However, simply walking past another dog on a public trail generally does not amount to contributory negligence.
How JRJ LAW Helps in Dog Bite Cases
In dog bite files, our work is focused, careful, and practical.
We establish ownership and responsibility under the Dog Owners’ Liability Act, organize medical and veterinary evidence, and present the claim with clarity and restraint. Where relationships exist between parties, such as neighbours or acquaintances, we manage the file professionally and respectfully.
Dog bite injuries happen in moments that no one expects. A walk, a trail, an ordinary afternoon. Ontario law recognizes that responsibility rests with those who choose to own and control dogs. If you or your pet were injured and you need clear answers about your rights, JRJ LAW offers free consultations focused on protecting recovery with care and precision.
Please contact JRJ LAW at 1 (844) DIAL JRJ for a free consultation!