LockeJohn, ‘Second Treatise’ in LaslettPeter (ed), Two Treatises of Government (Cambridge University Press, 1988) 265, 288–289; BlackstoneWilliam, Commentaries on the Laws of England (StrahanAWoodfallW, 12th ed, 1794) Vol 2, 2.
2.
KantImmanuel, Lectures on Ethics (InfieldLouis, trans, Harper Torchbooks, 1963) 239–40.
FrancioneGary, Animals, Property, and the Law (Temple University Press, 2007) 107.
6.
Farm animals are generally excluded from the scope of animal welfare legislation. See, eg, s 6 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act1986 (Vic).
7.
EpsteinRichard, ‘Animals as Objects, or Subjects, of Rights’ in SunsteinCass RNussbaumMartha C (eds), Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions (Oxford University Press, 2004) 143, 149.
8.
Ibid148.
9.
GarnerRobert, ‘Political Ideology and the Legal Status of Animals’ (2002) 8Animal Low77, 79–80.
10.
Ibid82–3.
11.
In Victoria, for instance, the campaigns and social movements that followed two unsuccessful court cases in the areas of access to clinical infertility treatment and lesbian parenting created public awareness on the respective issues and made way for more progressive laws: SifrisAdiva, ‘Lesbian Parenting in Australia: Demosprudence and Legal Change’ in GerberPaulaSifrisAdiva (eds), Current Trends in the Regulation of Same-Sex Relationships (The Federation Press, 2011)8, 15.
12.
For a discussion on different views as to the nature of legal personality in common law systems see, eg, NaffineNgaire, ‘Who Are Law's Persons? From Cheshire Cats to Responsible Subjects’ (2003) 66Modern Law Review347.
13.
Schweizerisches Zivilgesetzbuch [Civil Code], art 641a (Swiss Civil Code).
GerritsenVanessa, Animal Welfare in Switzerland – constitutional aim, social commitment, and a major challenge' (2013) 1Global Journal of Animal Law1, 4.
21.
MichelMargotKayassehEveline Schneider, The Legal Situation of Animals in Switzerland: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back – Many Steps to Go' (2011) VIIJournal of Animal Law1, 20.
Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland [Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany] art 20a; Österreichische Bundesverfassung [Constitution of Austria] art 11 (8); and Bundesverfassung der Schweizerischen Eidgenossenschaft [Swiss Federal Constitution] art 120.
25.
There are some parallels between the categorisation of animals in Austria, Germany and Switzerland and those states, cities and counties in the United States that have replaced the term ‘owner’ with ‘guardian’ in their animal welfare legislation concerning companion animals. The Guardian Campaign, a movement initiated by the In Defense of Animals advocacy group, has been advocating the change in terminology. So far, 18 cities, two counties and one state have adopted the term ‘guardian’ instead of ‘owner’: In Defense of Animals, Do You Live in a Guardian Community, The Guardian Campaign <http://www.guardiancampaign.org/guardiancity.html>.
The People of the State of New York ex rel. The Nonhuman Rights Project Inc, on behalf of Tommy v Patrick C Lavery (NY Sup Ct, 518336, 4 December 2014) 4.
33.
The Nonhuman Rights Project Inc, on behalf of Kiko v Carmen Presti, Christie Presti and the Primate Sanctuary Inc (NY Sup Ct, 2 January 2015), 2.
34.
The Nonhuman Rights Project Inc, on behalf of Kiko v Carmen Presti, Christie Presti and the Primate Sanctuary Inc (NY Sup Ct, 2 January 2015), 2.
