This is an appeal by Kathy Singh from her conviction and sentence for wilful neglect of a domestic cat in her care under section 446(1)(c) of the Criminal Code.
Singh operated a pet shelter where animals could be brought for adoption called The Pet Sanctuary. It was acknowledged by both the prosecution and the defence as a “no kill animal shelter” as it did not have a euthanasia policy.
The Humane Society received a complaint about the condition of the cat. The charge arose following the complaint received relating to a sick cat at the Pet Sanctuary. The Society delivered the cat to a veterinarian for treatment. The veterinarian was unable to cure the cat and had to euthanize it, billing the Society $860 for his services.
Singh was fined $1,000 and had to repay the Society $860. Singh argued that the conviction should be set aside because of a statement she made to the Society inspector. Singh appealed against the sentence because of her impecuniosity. She was unable to work because of poor health.
The appeal against the conviction dismissed, however, the appeal against the sentence was allowed. The issue was not her ownership of the shelter. It was whether the Crown had proved the offence beyond a reasonable doubt and there was sufficient evidence to support this conclusion.
Source: Case Law