real-estate damages new-zealand animals real-property
Who is responsible for the bull&#39;s damage?
<p>Bob owns and lives on a piece of land adjoining another, vacant one owned by Alice. There is a sheep fence between them which Bob has installed at his own expense (even though he legally could demand Alice to contribute).</p>
<p>There is Rob who owns some cattle and Alice allows him to graze them on her land, despite that they know the fence won't necessarily keep the cattle in.</p>
<p>One day one Rob's bull breaks the fence and makes his way onto Bob's land, causing some other minor damage too.</p>
<p>Who is responsible for the fence and other damage caused by the bull? Alice? Rob? Both?</p>
<p>Would the answer change if Rob was a close relative to  Alice e.g. her adult son?</p>

<p><strong>Rob is responsible. No Bull!</strong></p>
<p>Around the world, the law of wandering cattle depends on the details. New Zealand is no different.</p>
<p>This case is covered by s 26 of the <em>Impounding Act of 1955</em>, <a href="http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1955/0108/latest/whole.html#DLM294171" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Damages for Trespass</em></a>. As you said, S 26(1)(d) says Bob is entitled to damages whenever his &quot;land (<em>whether fenced or unfenced</em>) is situated in a city.&quot; This is different to the rest of the country, where <em>animals must be fenced out.</em></p>
<p>S 26(2) of the <em>Impounding Act</em> says the damage is owed by Rob, as the <em>owner</em> of the stock:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(2) <em>In any case</em> where damages are payable under this section the amount of any damage <em>shall be recoverable</em> by action from the <em>owner of the stock</em>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It may be that Rob and Alice have some arrangement that Alice will indemnify Rob against any trespass damages. But that agreement does not change the underlying law; it only allows him to recoup his loses (by suing his mother, if necessary!).</p>
<p><strong>Added: Something fun to read</strong></p>
<p>Law professor Robert Ellickson studied how people actually resolve disputes over wandering cattle in Shasta county in northern California. There's a readable summary of what he found <a href="https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1465&amp;context=fss_papers#page=35" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>. (The title of his book, &quot;<a href="https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674641693" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Order without law</a>,&quot; sums up his main finding -- there are rules that are enforced, but those rules have little to do with the formal law or law enforcement.)</p>
