Court Confirms when a Worker Is a Dog’s ‘Owner’

Why It Matters

The ruling exposes pet‑care workers and their employers to unexpected liability, forcing a review of risk allocation and coverage. It also sets a precedent that could shape animal‑related liability standards across Canada.

Key Takeaways

• DOLA treats any caretaker with control as the dog’s legal owner
• Ontario courts dismissed a walker’s suit, deeming her the liable owner
• Liability risk now extends to groomers, kennel staff, and contractors
• Employers must map custody points and adjust insurance and contracts
• Other provinces use similar custody‑based liability, raising nationwide exposure

Pulse Analysis

Ontario’s Dog Owners’ Liability Act (DOLA) has become a focal point for liability discussions after two courts affirmed that anyone exercising care and control of a dog can be deemed its legal owner. The landmark case involving part‑time walker Amanda Nigro illustrated how a routine task—putting booties on a dog—can trigger a liability claim against the caretaker rather than the dog’s registered owners. By interpreting DOLA’s language broadly, the courts aim to place responsibility on those best positioned to prevent bites, but the decision also creates a new class of “owner” that many workers and employers had not considered.

While DOLA is unique to Ontario, similar custody‑based liability frameworks exist elsewhere in Canada. Manitoba’s Animal Liability Act and Quebec’s civil code both extend responsibility to the custodian of an animal at the time of an incident. In provinces without specific statutes, general negligence law and municipal bylaws often define “owner” to include anyone who possesses, harbours, or cares for a dog. This patchwork of regulations means that businesses operating in multiple jurisdictions face a consistent exposure: the employee or contractor handling a client’s pet may be held financially accountable for injuries or damages.

For pet‑care providers, hospitality firms, security agencies, and any organization whose staff interact with client‑owned animals, the practical response is clear. Companies should map every point where staff may have custody of a dog, embed clear risk‑allocation language in service contracts, and verify that workers’ compensation, commercial general liability, and professional liability policies cover animal‑related incidents. Training programs that teach safe handling and de‑escalation techniques are essential to mitigate risk. As courts continue to apply DOLA’s expansive definition, proactive contract management and robust insurance become critical safeguards against costly lawsuits.