Ontario省的法律对养狗还是很严格的. 如果你的狗惊吓,袭击,或者咬了别人,你可能会被判刑事罪.
The laws of Ontario make a dog owner strictly liable for damages resulting from a bite or attack by the dog on another person or domestic animal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statutory law
The Dog Owners Liability Act provides that, "The owner of a dog is liable for damages resulting from a bite or attack by the dog on another person or domestic animal." R.S.O. 1990, c. D.16, s. 1.
The dog owner is not only liable in damages, but also may be convicted of a crime and fined. "The owner of a dog shall exercise reasonable precautions to prevent it from biting or attacking a person or domestic animal." 2000, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 6. If a person fails to exercise such precautions, he or she may be found "guilty of an offence and liable, on conviction, to a fine not exceeding $5,000." 2000, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 6.
There is no requirement that the dog previously bit another person. "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." R.S.O. 1990, c. D.16, s. 2 (3).
A significant difference between Ontario law and the usual dog bite strict liability statute in the United States is that there is no automatic exemption for trespassers. Trespassers are not mentioned in the Dog Owners Liability Act. The Act is the only law that provides liability. "Where damage is caused by being bitten or attacked by a dog on the premises of the owner, the liability of the owner is determined under this Act and not under the Occupiers' Liability Act." R.S.O. 1990, c. D.16, s. 3 (1).
Another difference between Ontario law and many US dog bite statutes is that the former does not automatically exempt a criminal. "Where a person is on premises with the intention of committing, or in the commission of, a criminal act on the premises and incurs damage caused by being bitten or attacked by a dog, the owner is not liable under section 2 unless the keeping of the dog on the premises was unreasonable for the purpose of the protection of persons or property." R.S.O. 1990, c. D.16, s. 3 (2).
In addition to awarding a judgment for damages, a court may issue orders pertaining to the control or euthanasia of the dog. "If, in a proceeding under subsection (1), the court finds that the dog has bitten or attacked a person or domestic animal, and the court is satisfied that an order is necessary for the protection of the public, the court may order, (a) that the dog be destroyed in the manner specified in the order; or (b) that the owner of the dog take the measures specified in the order for the more effective control of the dog. 2000, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 6.
