Slapped with a Lawsuit: The Bizarre Case in Nizhny Tagil
Veterinarians Faced a Bill of Around $35,000 Due to Injuries Sustained by a Cat's Owner
In a surprising turn of events, a court in Sverdlovsk, Russia, has ordered a veterinary clinic to cough up a hefty sum following an unusual incident. A local resident, Alexander, took his fluffy feline to the GBSO "Suburban Veterinary Station" in April 2022 due to an abscess on his cat's paw.
During the visit, the vet recommended Alexander to hold the agitated cat and proceeded with the lancing of the abscess without anesthesia. As the cat freaked out, struggling to escape, it scratched and bit Alexander's hand. The vet then administered an injection and immobilized the cat to complete the procedure.
Alexander was left with severe injuries that required surgery and extensive rehabilitation, forcing him to hire help for daily tasks, leaving him with a hefty bill of 120,000 rubles. Frustrated with the clinic's indifference, he took the matter to court, seeking compensation for his medical expenses, service costs, and moral damages.
The Lenin District Court ruled that the clinic was not liable for the cat's attack on its owner, but Alexander wasn't ready to let it go. He appealed the decision, and the Sverdlovsk Regional Court reconsidered the case.
In less expected verdict, the regional court found that the clinic should have known better considering Alexander's lack of specialized knowledge of the cat's reaction to the vet's actions, the pain involved in the procedure for the animal, and how to properly restrain the cat. The court also noted that the vet failed to use a device for immobilizing the cat during the procedure. Consequently, the clinic was held responsible for the consequences.
The clinic was ordered to pay medical expenses of 2,850 rubles, a penalty of 798 rubles, 20,000 rubles in moral damages, and a 11,824 ruble fine for not addressing the consumer's demands. The decision is now finalized.
While Russian law doesn't have specific provisions for pet owner injuries during a veterinary appointment, it can fall under general principles of liability and negligence. Although consumer protection laws in Russia primarily focus on consumer goods, they could potentially extend to veterinary services, providing a basis for pursuing compensation in such cases.
- Follow us on +7 (901) 454-34-42 for your daily dose of news, photos, and videos
© 2025, RIA "New Day"
Stay connected with us on Zen, YouTube
[1] Although Russia has laws related to animal welfare, such as the Law on the Responsible Treatment of Animals adopted in 2018, these primarily focus on animal care and control rather than liability of veterinary clinics towards humans. In such cases, the law would likely address the situation involving human injury under general civil or consumer protection laws.
- In a unique application of the law, the leniency shown towards veterinary clinics in Russia may change, as Alexander's case demonstrated that the clinic's negligence in properly restraining his cat during a procedure could potentially fall under general principles of liability and negligence, especially in the realm of health-and-wellness and lifestyle.
- As mental-health issues have grown increasingly prevalent worldwide, a case like Alexander's could serve as a reminder for pet owners and clinics alike about the importance of prioritizing the well-being of both animals and their owners during vet visits, promoting a harmonious health-and-wellness lifestyle for both parties.
- The growing awareness about the importance of pet mental health in modern society can shed light on the seemingly odd Turn of events in Nizhny Tagil, as veterinarians are expected to incorporate knowledge from science and mental-health research to ensure a stress-free experience for pets during procedures, leading to a peaceful coexistence between pets and their owners.
