Could Feeding Strays Leave You Paying for Other’s Injuries?

Our story today begins on a seemingly ordinary day, April 20, 2023, when our protagonist, John, and his colleagues decided to hit the badminton courts for a friendly game. Little did they know, their evening was about to take a turn for the surreal.

Picture this: John, in the heat of the game, lunges for a spectacular shot—only to find himself flying through the air, not because of his athletic prowess, but because he stepped on a cat! Yes, folks, a cat. Down he went, and off to the hospital he went that very evening. After surgery and a medical evaluation, John was deemed to have a tenth-degree disability.

Now, you might think the cat would step forward and apologize, but alas, it’s not that kind of story. Instead, John’s family reached out to the badminton court management, seeking compensation. But just when you thought things couldn’t get stranger, they were informed that the surveillance cameras were out of order. To add to the drama, their negotiations hit a brick wall, and so, they did what any modern-day hero would do—they took the matter to court.

Here’s where the plot thickens. The court had to figure out who was responsible for this feline fiasco. Initially, the verdict was that our badminton-loving cat feeder, Steve, had to bear some responsibility. But, the court also pointed fingers at the badminton court for their managerial mishaps and lack of proper safety measures.

In the courtroom drama sequel, the re-trial, everyone was still pointing fingers. The court, however, had the final say. They invoked the mighty Civil Code—specifically Articles 1165 and 1172. The gist? If your actions (or inactions) cause harm due to negligence, you’re on the hook for damages. And if multiple parties are involved, they each get a slice of that responsibility pie.

So, what did the court decide in our case of the badminton court vs. John vs. the cat? The court decreed that the sports equipment company, as the owner and manager of the badminton court, should have known better. They knew cats were on the premises, thanks to our cat-loving coach, and did nothing about it. They let the cat roam free, failed to fix the broken surveillance system, and basically turned a blind eye to potential hazards. For all these reasons, they were held primarily responsible for John’s injuries.

But let’s not forget Steve, the coach. His daily feeding rituals near the court’s east gate had turned the cat into a regular court crasher, bringing danger into the badminton paradise. So, he wasn’t off the hook either.

In conclusion, the moral of this story is simple: If you run a badminton court, keep your eyes peeled for stray cats. And if you’re a coach with a big heart for felines, maybe think twice about feeding them near the court. After all, you never know when a simple game of badminton might turn into a courtroom drama.