Animal Rights Law - Chapter 6
Loading
Loading

Chapter 6 - Animal Rights in Litigation

This chapter is divided into two parts. In the first part, you will find a useful list with links to all the cases cited in the book, as well as some additional cases. In the second part, you will find scholarly references on all the topics covered in the book chapter.

Cases cited in Chapter 6

Cetacean Community v Bush

Sea World (Tilikum)

Naruto

Tommy and Kiko

Hercules and Leo

Cecilia

Chucho

  • Tribunal Superior del Distrito Judicial de Manizales [T.S.D.J.Man.] [Superior Court of the Judicial District of Manizales], Sala Civ. Fam. julio 13, 2017, M.S: C. Cruz Valencia, Expediente 17001-22-13-000-2017-00468-00

Beulah, Karen, and Minnie

Happy

Nagaraja

Kaavan

Swiss Primates Rights

Estrellita

Md Mohazzim

Stray Dogs

Karnail Singh

Sandra

Additional cases

Reece

  • For an additional case on access to justice for animals, which includes discussion of animal rights, see Fraser CJA’s dissenting judgment in the Canadian case, Reece v Edmonton (City of), 2011 ABCA 238, available at https://h2o.law.harvard.edu/medias/3141

Hamat Gader and Noah

Cat Welfare Society

Chapter 6 references

  1. Introduction
  1. Animals and the Issue of Legal Standing to Bring an Action
  • For an analysis of how and why courts avoid hearing contentious issues (such as through appealing to procedural requirements like standing doctrine), see: Erin F Delaney, ‘Analyzing Avoidance: Judicial Strategy in Comparative Perspective’ (2016) 66 Duke Law Journal 1, available at http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dlj/vol66/iss1/1
  1. Animals as Subjects of Habeas Corpus
  • For a critical discussion of the potentials and limits of habeas corpus litigation for animals, see: Jessica Eisen, ‘Litigating Animal Captivity’ in Lori Gruen and Justin Marceau (eds), Carceral Logics: Human Incarceration and Animal Captivity (Cambridge University Press 2022), available at https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108919210.023
  • For commentary on the Tommy cases, see: Holly Duggan, ‘Aping Personhood’ in Kevin Curran (ed), Renaissance Personhood: Materiality, Taxonomy, Process (Edinburgh University Press 2020, available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctvss3wwb.10
  • For commentary on the Hercules and Leo cases, see: A Chimp’s Day in Court: Inside the Historic Demand for Nonhuman Rights and Chimpanzee Rights Get a Day in Court, Brandon Keim, The Eye of the Sandpiper: Stories from the Living World (Cornell University Press 2017)
  1. Fundamental Rights and Personhood Litigation Beyond Habeas Corpus
  • For commentary on the Swiss Primates Rights case, see: Charlotte E Blattner and Raffael Fasel, ‘The Swiss Primate Case: How Courts Have Paved the Way for the First Direct Democratic Vote on Animal Rights’ (2022) 11 Transnational Environmental Law 1, available at https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102521000170
  • For an amicus curiae brief cited in the Estrellita case, see: Brief of amicus curiae The Brooks McCormick Jr. Animal Law & Policy Program at Harvard Law School and the Nonhuman Rights Project in Constitutional Court of Ecuador, Case No. 253-20-JH (2022), available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4251831
  1. Conclusion
  • For an analysis of habeas litigation conducted by Nonhuman Rights Project, applying insights from legal theory (formalism and indeterminacy), see: Ashleigh PA Best, ‘Property or “Penumbral” Persons? An Examination of Two Jurisprudential Approaches to the Nonhuman Rights Project Litigation’ (2018) 14 Journal of Animal and Natural Resource Law 33, available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3865379

  • For an argument about the utility and appropriateness of habeas corpus litigation as a means to free animals from harsh confinement, see: Justin F Marceau and Steven M Wise, ‘Exonerating the Innocent’ in Daniel S Medwed (ed), Wrongful convictions and the DNA revolution twenty-five years of freeing the innocent (Cambridge University Press 2018), available at https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316417119.018