Judgement reserved in landmark animal-welfare trial over horse exporter

An animal welfare case involving a Manitoba horse exporter wrapped up in court Friday.

A judge has reserved a decision in a landmark animal welfare case concerning the overseas export of live horses for slaughter, following a two-day provincial court trial.

Animal rights organization Animal Justice brought the case against a Manitoba-based horse exporter, alleging the company violated federal animal welfare regulations.

The legal action stems from a Dec. 12, 2022 air shipment of horses by Carolyle Farms, located in the Swan River area. The company intended to ship 79 horses from Winnipeg Richardson International Airport to Japan, where they were destined for slaughter and consumption as raw sashimi.

However, a snowstorm in Anchorage, Alaska—a scheduled stopover—delayed the aircraft on the tarmac for more than four hours. Although the shipment ultimately continued after being rerouted through Seattle, Wash., the total travel time is alleged to have reached over 33 hours.

The exporter is accused of violating a provision of Canada’s Health of Animals Regulation, which requires a contingency plan to prevent unnecessary animal suffering, injury, or death in the event of unforeseen delays.

Federal law dictates a 28-hour limit that live horses can be transported without food, water and rest. Animal Justice originally sought two charges, one for exceeding the limit and another charge for lacking an adequate contingency plan. The Crown chose not to proceed with the charge around the time limit.

While Carolyle Farms filed a contingency plan with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) in September 2022, Animal Justice counsel Dan Stein argued the plan did not address risks beyond the airport.

“Our submission is that no proof of actual harm is required. This is a planning offence,” Stein told the court. “Prosecution doesn’t need to prove death, injury or visible suffering ... What we have to prove is that Carolyle Farms failed to plan for delays or circumstances that could have resulted in unnecessary suffering or death.”

Defence lawyer Lindsay Mulholland countered that the exporter was not responsible for contingency planning for the entire duration of the journey, arguing that obligation lay with the commercial air carrier or the consignee.

She also maintained that the contingency plan does not have a specific format or required content and said the prosecution failed to prove that no verbal contingency arrangements were in place.

Animal Justice, along with other animal advocacy agencies, originally filed a complaint with the CFIA. However, the federal agency declined to pursue enforcement action.

That decision prompted Animal Justice executive director Camille Labchuk to initiate a private prosecution—a rare legal process. The move involves a criminal charge being brought forward by a private individual, also called a private informant, rather than by police or government authorities.

The case is believed to mark the first time a private prosecution involving farm animals has proceeded to trial in Canada.

Provincial Court Justice Sandra Chapman has reserved her judgment in the case. A date for the decision has not yet been finalized.

-With files from CTV’s Daniel Halmarson