For work.
Mrs. Wong, foster the dog at the pet store.
I was told a few days later.
The dog's gone!
To raise a dog of love.
Ms. Wong sent him to the training base.
I see it as a family.
Claims for compensation in the face of change
What are the responsibilities of the pet shop?
The dog is missing.
Ms. Wang spent $6,800 on buying a dog called "Bucks". She sent “bricks” to the training base to develop behavioural habits at a cost of $25,000 for training, accommodation, etc.
"My buns are small, but they're smart and they're good at training. My family is not around, and I'm with them day and night, like a family member.
As a result of her work trip, Ms. Wang had to temporarily foster “bricks” at a pet shop in Ange County, Lake City, Zhejiang Province, paying approximately $1,000 in foster care. Not a few days later, but the owner of the pet store told me that the buns are gone!
In the unsuccessful search, Ms. Wang negotiated compensation with the pet shop, but no agreement was reached. As a result, Ms. Wang applied to the court for compensation of $31,800 for economic loss and $5,000 for moral damages.
The pet store is liable for default.
The people ' s court of Angie county in Zhejiang province has found that consumers pay for their services to pet shops, which have an obligation to provide them with pet services and should also ensure their health and safety.
In this case, the service contract relationship between Ms. Wang and the pet shop was valid and the pet shop was liable for breach of contract. Although Ms. Wang spent $25,000 on training pet dogs at a purchase price of $6,800, the loss exceeded the normal expectations of the pet shop, and the court decided that the pet shop would compensate Ms. Wang for the loss of pet dogs totalling $13,000, taking into account that the pet dog had been trained to increase its own value.
Taking into account Ms. Wang's time and emotional dependence on pet dogs, and in accordance with the criteria in force for the recognition of “specific things of personal significance”, the Court found that the loss of the pet dog in question did not meet the conditions for claiming moral damages, and it rejected Ms. Wang's claim for moral damages of $5,000.
Definition of moral damages
Article 113 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China provides that: “In the event of serious moral damage to the personal rights and interests of natural persons, the aggrieved person shall have the right to claim moral damages. The aggrieved person is entitled to claim moral damages if serious moral damage is caused by wilful or gross negligence against a particular person of personal interest.”
Justice protects the spiritual home of every natural person in our country. When the owner of an object invests deep feelings in certain objects, such as a monument, a relic, a wedding picture, a photograph of the marriage ceremony, a hall, a genealogy, a family lineage, and so on, in order for it to be of special commemorative value and personal interest, its disappearance would cause some physical and mental damage to the owner, who has the right to bring a claim to court for moral damages.
In combination with legal provisions and social practice, domestic pets with the above-mentioned attributes and characteristics, such as pets that have been raised for longer periods of time, and pets of elderly persons, are also “specific things of personal significance”, and it is feasible for the owner of the stock to claim moral damages. However, there were strict limits to moral damages, and in the present case, the pet dog and Ms. Wang did not spend a very long time with a particular object of “personal significance” and the court did not support Ms. Wang's claim for moral damages.