Hi miss glllespie I know that others have given similar advice but surely it is better to try and iron out the problem through discussion with the breeder.No point in causing bad feeling and lining the pockets of a lawyer when it can be avoided.

My thinking goes along with those who have always used "stud rights" to mean that when a dog is sold we retain the right ot use him at stud on our own bitches, free of charge.  We do try to make this clear in contracts, and  sometimes add that we must approve  outside bitches who come to the dog.  Occasionally when a dog is pet homed or sold at a reduced rate then we retain "full stud rights" by which we mean the right to use him on our bitches and to have the stud fees from any visiting bitches.  Having said that it is more usual for us to sell a pup with limited stud rights - meanign we get approval of any bitches, and power of veto.  It all comes down to terminology, and to what you and the breeder discussed before it went down in writing.

Perhaps you could think more positively about this - OK, you have conditioned your dog well and have shown him succesfully but the basic "Stuff" comes from the breeders care and experience.  IF they breed good dogs and have excellent bitches it can only enhance your dog's reputation to be used on 1 or more of these bitches, and hopefully produce quality pups.  If you trusted them enough to buy your boy form them, surely you can trust them enough to discuss this whole matter like adults and make sure each of you understands the others side of things.  If it turns out there are misunderstandings then the best way is to try and sort them out.  It sounds to me like you are fairly new to the dog world, why make trouble before trying to resolve things, it's never a good idea to join a new "community" and start making waves straight away.

The other thing that has been niggling at my mind is that, yes, you say you paid 'full price' for him but I am more inclined to view it as being the price the breeder wanted for a show potential puppy but one which she was willing to sell with stud rights.  It may have well been the case that he would not have been made available to you at all unless you were willing to sign the stud rights contract or would have been a higher price if you had NOT been willing to sign.  Therefore, in reality, you may well have bought him at a reduced cash price as the breeder was counting the 'benefits' of the stud rights into the equation.

Hope this makes sense :-)

Not had time to read through all the replies, but I would say that in the dog world "stud rights" could well mean that she has the right to use your dog whenever she wants - and free of charge at that - however, if this is exacly how the contract is worded, then it is very much open to interpretation and I am not convinced a solicitor would consider that this contract - legally speaking- means you have to allow her to use him without ever having to pay a stud fee. I genuinely can't see that being the case at all. If the breeder was expecting to use him FREE OF CHARGE then that should have been made abundantly clear in the contract, which it certainly isn't. I just think a solicitor will interpret it as meaning that the breeder has the right to use him (on any of her bitches) whenever she wants, nothing more nothing less... but in reality, this should all have been established when you both signed the contract (obviously). Good luck !

[replying to the thread, not necessarily the post I clicked on]

My experience of 'breeding rights' as they were called was that one of the dogs I was interested in in Sweden was owned by one person, but the breeder had a contract that said she retained the breeding rights (meaning she could choose the bitch and got the stud fees) for 3 breedings or 3 years whichever came first.  So within that country's KC the owner owned the dog and the dog was registered to her, but the breeder signed the stud forms and received the fees for any breedings that fell under the terms of the contract.  Once the term was fulfilled either by date or number of breedings then the rights were back with the registered owner.

So having learned that from my 'continental' experience when I read the OP's post and saw the breeder retained 'stud rights' I just automatically assumed that meant the breeder kept the rights to use the dog as she wished and retained any stud fees from those matings.

I think certainly before you sign a contract you need to make sure exactly what you're signing, and if it's not clear then ask for it to be clarified, and that part of the contract re-written to be made more clear before signing it.

I know hindsight is 20/20 but unfortunately if it's the contract you signed, then you have to honour it or come to some other kind of agreement.  Neutering the dog is very likely in breach of contract and depending on the solicitor you each get she could sue you for that and no guarantee which will win.

You really need to work this out personally between you - getting solicitors etc involved (unless as an absolute last resort) will only make things worse, not better.

As for the initial mating where the pups were reabsorbed any stud owner worth their salt would offer a free repeat for a mating that produced no pups irrespective of whether that first mating was free - so regardless of the contract I do believe that the right thing to do is let her have a second mating FOC.

Just my .02

>As for the initial mating where the pups were reabsorbed any stud owner worth their salt would offer a free repeat for a mating that produced no pups irrespective of whether that first mating was free - so regardless of the contract I do believe that the right thing to do is let her have a second mating FOC.

100% agree with this.  I once had someone use my dog, bitch pregnant, so my half of the proceedings had been delivered.  One dead puppy, and an absolutely devastated bitch owner.

I had not charged the earth - just £200 stud fee, but offered a free return anyway.  It is a breed that only carries, on average 1-3 pups, and I hope that someone would do me the same favour if I had a dead litter.

It doesn't matter how "stud rights" are viewed in the dog breeding world, all that matters is how the actual contract is viewed legally - ie a solicitors interpretation of it. Unless it states that the stud dog owner retains the right to use the dog at stud free of charge then I doubt that is how the law will view it. Yes, it does sound as though the contract means that she can use him whenever she wants, but that is all. I agree that by having him neutered the OP could be in breach of this contract and so I wouldn't advise it.