Father and sledge dogs´ owner: an oxymoron?

Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main (Case No. 1 UF 170/20) Is it nowadays to be considered an oxymoron, to be a father and also a dog owner? This week we are going to discuss the case of Mr. Veilke and his pack of sledge dogs. The Case Mr. Veilke lives separately from his (ex)wife, but they have a two-year-old child together, who is usually living with his mother. However, a right of contact has been agreed for the weekends – and also confirmed by court order. The mother still opposes to the fact the child should also spent time with his father for this strange reason: Mr Veilke has seven dogs, most of them huskies. She fears that the animals could harm the child. The competent family court therefore demands the absence of the huskies when the child is present. The father lodges an appeal against this requirement – and justice is granted at the Higher Regional Court in Frankfurt am Main. Tribunal Decision The child may visit its father, without having this latter to lock away his seven huskies. After all, the breed of dogs is known to be humane, social and gentle. It can also be assumed that the sledge dogs are well-behaved and obedient. However, the father must ensure that his child, who is just under two years old, is not left unattended with the animals. The decision can no longer be contested.  

What do you think about this tribunal decision? Are you facing similar legal problems and you would like to know what your rights are? Get in touch with us. We are here to help.

Source of the pic:  badamczak80 from www.pixabay.com.

Practical supplement added 13 November 2026. The original article above retains its historical context. The following scenarios are hypothetical and are not additional findings of the court or events reported in that article.

Legal assessment and practical approach

Keeper, owner, possessor and contractual supervisor can be different people. Actual arrangements and the relevant legal basis matter. Contracts help allocate responsibilities but do not replace examination of who really controls keeping and use.

Four practical examples

These are hypothetical scenarios illustrating issues to assess. They do not describe actual client matters or promise a particular outcome.

Practical example 1

A parent buys a dog permanently cared for by an adult daughter. Examine control, costs and personal interest when determining keeper status. The name on the invoice is not conclusive.

Practical example 2

A yard cares for someone else’s horse for payment. Contractual supervision duties may matter alongside keeper liability. The livery agreement and actual care establish the respective responsibilities.

Practical example 3

A carer takes a dog for two weeks. Clarify instructions, known risks and insurance before handover. Temporary care does not automatically establish permanent keeper status.

Practical example 4

Two people share expenses and decisions for an animal. A claim may require assessment of multiple keepers. Their internal allocation of costs does not alone determine liability to an injured third party.

Prepare the relevant evidence

Provide complete documents and a concise chronology. Distinguish your observations from statements by others and unresolved questions. Include attachments, evidence of service and deadlines with official notices and correspondence. Preserve original files, images and message histories unchanged; an organised working copy assists review.

Tell us about your matter and deadlines