Please can you help me, I have been told that there is an European Court Judgement upholding the original breeder's rights to ban breeding of her puppies sold solely as pets, and if a mating does occur, any resulting litter remains the property of the breeder of the bitch.
Obviously such a contract was entered into willingly at the time by the purchaser of the puppy.
I understand there is a website referring to this judgement but cannot find it.

In the UK when puppies are sold the real rights pass to the buyer this would include any resulting puppies. HOWEVER there is the endorsement Scheme with the KC which would stay in place IF the correct procedures had been followed when the puppy was sold. The would restrict any puppies being registered. 

Although my advice is that the breeder doesn't have real rights to the puppies IF the full ownership was passed to the new owner at the time of sale.  I will however never advocate people breeding pet litters from pet bitches for the sake of it or against the breeders wishes.

Perhaps what you have been told is not the full story, which is often the case. Heard of several of late when joint ownership issues had arisen.

Thank you Blue, puppies are endorsed x and r and purchaser has signed acceptance of those stipulations, The breeding would not necessarily be to the same breed . eg in order to produce labradoodles..and progeny therefore are not registerable whether endorsed or otherwise. Your statement was my previous understanding of uk contract law but I have been assured that there is a European Court judgement which resulted in ownership of the litter.being transferred.

If a " normal sale" had went through where real rights where transfered to the purchaser then the puppies would be the property of the owner.  I am not aware of any " one off" cases to the contrary.

I think it is awful though that someone would do this against the breeders wishes. I am a great believer in what comes around goes around in life . It will come back and bite the owner in the bum.

I heard recent of someone who had been doing a few naughty things similar, took a few litters out of a restricted bitch, 1 litter died, 2 next litters only produced small litters of males.  This person gained nothing but a terrible reputation.

It can be very hard at times being a breeder.

Hi

My neighbour has a bitch, a  pet and has no intentions of breeding her. but when she brought it the breeder made her sign a contract that said if she did breed her she would have to pay the breeder a percentage of the money from the sale of the pups. I wasnt sure how legally binding this would be.

Wendy

That is preposterous lumphy! To demand a prophet from any future pups.  By all means a breeder has every right to put an endorsment on a bitch if it needs to be ok'd health, breed standard and line breed wise first before any acceptable breeding, it is the breeders reputation at stake and only good stock should be bred from.

But that is disgusting, she is saying that the bitch is ok to breed from, and I want money from the pups too. The bitch is no longer hers, she has sold it, she has no right to anything. I take it there are no endorsments either, as she would not have been able to breed in the first case.

Luckily your friend only wants a pet and will not be breeding, as I certainly would have that contract thrown out in any court room, it is preposterous. (Or at least I would try) What a cheek!

Perhaps Wendy's friend hasn't provided all the details?  It could be the bitch was sold on terms and at a reduced purchase price therefore reference made to some sort of reimbursement when a litter was born?

In those (rough) circumstances it would be quite normal in the canine world.......

Snap Terri :-)

I too thought of that one, and it would make perfect sense then, but then I re-read the post, and the dog was sold as a pet, with restrictions that If she were to be bred from, which led me to think the bitch was sold at normal price to start with, which just makes the breeder a greedy so and so.

I know what you mean but most breeders sell all their pups as pets - OK, they acknowledge that some appear to have "show potential" or "breeding potential" but nevertheless all as pets ;)  Think of the breeders who could be sued otherwise.

My pups were sold on that basis - endorsed but with agreement to lift same should they prove to be of sufficient breed quality, appropriately tested with good results, and have retained good temperament.  Certainly I have no arrangement for me to be eligible for any subsequent pups or monies relating to them though - but it does happen of course!

I personally don't approve of "breeding terms" but thousands do - I still think this tale could be on those lines ......

Possibly. It is a very unusual scenario, usually when it comes to contracts the buyers fully understand the terms and the reasons behind it, lumphy is querying the legalities which makes me think that her friend does not know why, sometimes people just sign things because they want something so much and then think about it afterwards, this seems to be one of those cases, as lumpy's friend would have just told her the reason why the breeder was to have any prophets from the pups and there would be no query.

Like me, you can't see why a breeder would do that without a very good reason. Perhaps as you say lumphy's friend has not explained things properly, I hope that is the case. :-(

Possibly. It is a very unusual scenario

Really not that unusual at all.

Hi

I dont know the full details but I do know she paid the full price for the bitch. There was a lot of other restrictions to. She cannot take her out the country for instance. I think there was a breeding restriction on her so these would have to be lifted so the breeder knew the bitch was to be mated.

My neighbour agreed to it because she didnt know any better and only wanted her as a pet

Wendy

What she has requested is perfectly reasonable to protect her line, apart from the profit from the pups, which is a complete liberty and I have never yet met a breeder to do that. IMO it is absolutely disgusting.

>She cannot take her out the country for instance.

If this refers to the "Not eligible for the issue of an Export Pedigree" endorsement, that doesn't mean the animal isn't allowed to leave the country. ;) It means that the KC won't issue it with an export pedigree to make it eligible for registration with another country's kennel club, and therefore breedable overseas. Your neighbour could certainly take the dog with her on holidays abroad (Pet Passport) or to live overseas if she decided to emigrate.

Putting the two endorsements onto the registration (both of which can be lifted at the breeder's discretion, by the way) is usually considered to be a sign of a caring breeder who values the line and doesn't want any pups used to produce indiscrimate litters.

>She cannot take her out the country for instance.

Perfect example of misunderstanding. The owner can take the dog out the country no problem. It perhaps cannot get an export pedigree.  All of my puppies are endorsed like this also. I am not greedy just cautious.

Hi Wendy

It could well be that your neighbour has purchased her dog from a greedy and, basically, dodgy breeder :(  However, it may be that your neighbour has little understanding of what she agreed to - unfortunately often the case and IMO down to the breeder to go through things with a fine tooth comb with prospective purchasers :rolleyes:  That way any "contract" or "terms" within it will hold up both with the KC and, if necessary, more likely to in law.

>She cannot take her out the country for instance

In all likeliehood she has misinterpreted the "not for export pedigree" endorsement - meaning that should she move abroad or sell the dog on abroad, it would not be eligible for "registration with a foreign Kennel Club".  Very different from her not being able to take her dog on holiday for eg or, for that matter, should she decide to migrate to warmer climes herself, up sticks and moving permanently over seas!  There is NO rule preventing anyone taking their dog abroad except those laid down by DEFRA or authorities in receiving countries re vacs and quarantine regulations :)

regards, Teri

Thank you for your replies but I'm a little disappointed that no one seems to know of this judgement. the whole point of my enquiry is to protect puppies from misuse, theres too many dogs born with little thought beyond immediate profit.

Hi Carole g

>the whole point of my enquiry is to protect puppies from misuse

You'll certainly find many like minded folks on here then :)  However, we have a legal eagle on board (sorry Pam!) and as she hasn't heard of this as yet then I strongly suspect it's quite reasonable that none of us (to date) have ;)

Perhaps you'll eventually trace your original source and be able to enlighten us all.

regards, Teri

but I'm a little disappointed that no one seems to know of this judgement.

I am confused that you are disappointed that no ones knows , there is no judgement as far as I am aware. Can't be more fairer than that.

Unfortunately it is one of the down sides to breeding dogs although you hope and pray one doesn't end up in the wrong hands, once you sell the puppy you can only hope that your selection criteria has been all that it can to prevent this happening.  Sadly one can slip through the net on occaison. At least if the endorsements are in place then fiancial gain cannot be gotten from the reputation of the dogs lines.  Which for a lot of people is as equally important.

Not neccesarily Carrington, It was one of the reasons I did reply right away to your post because  most breeders will sell the puppies a " pets" regardless and then if it turns out something special then it can be breed from.

At 8 weeks old there is no guarantee it will be show quality so a lot of breeders now don't sell them at top show price BUT a show prospect at not more than a pet price. If it them makes the grade some additional cost can be prearranged ( pre arranged though).

  Quite often a show prospect is sold at a pet price plus with a puppy back senario. I have bought like this myself on several occasions. 2 turning out suitable and 1 not. So the one that didn't turn out only cost me a pet price.

Without the whole story it is hard to say who is what.  I think people with really good show or working stock that have invested thousands of pounds are entitled not to hand their hard work over for next to nothing.

The terms which I think are suitable are perhaps entirely different to the person post perhaps.

I totally agree that you can not always tell which pup is going to be the best show potential/breeding stock as a pup, I would never want to reap my hard work monetarily though, I still feel this is disgusting, speaking for myself, once a pup is sold it is no longer mine, the new owners if interested in showing or breeding will use me as a guide, I will help them to find the best studs etc and offer them knowledge and take pride myself in good pups being produced, I would never reap money rewards, after all the pups and bitch are raised and cared for by the new owner, the stud is paid for by the new owner, what right do I have to charge her for the priviledge of having a good bitch, the new owner has already paid me for that, I get my rewards in other ways, not money.

And I personally don't enjoy hearing of this sort of thing going on.

Hi Carrington,

> once a pup is sold it is no longer mine

true, as is the case (to date) with myself but - and IMO it's a big "BUT" :P some breeders, much like myself, may have a limited number of dogs they can keep.  In my case, I'd say a max of 4 at any one time was easily manageable.  Were someone similar to me breed and not have room for another puppy but nevertheless want to improve and retain their lines, they may well sell a puppy on terms.  These could be many and varied but would basically cover that the breeder of the original pup got back something from the litter or, in many cases, had the litter bred under their own kennel name.

If someone has strived for years to retain and improve their stock but is still very much a "hobby breeder", I don't personally think it is unreasonable to try and find homes - more often than not good, permanent pet homes only, that would be agreeable at a later date to provide a way of furthering a line.

Every case should be judged on it's merits and, of course, no potential purchasers find themselves being abused at a later date because of ill applied red tape.

regards, Teri

I agree totally, Teri. I sold a promising bitch puppy to a couple who said they might be interested in showing her and having a litter under my guidance (choosing and paying for the stud, for example) and support if she turned out good enough - I couldn't keep her myself because I was lumbered with the two dog puppies that nobody wanted and there was no way I could raise three pups at a time - not properly, anyway! ;) As fate would have it, the bitch didn't fulfil her early promise and was never bred from anyway.

Were someone similar to me breed and not have room for another puppy but nevertheless want to improve and retain their lines, they may well sell a puppy on terms.

in many cases had the litter bred under their kennel name

Now that I like Teri, that I don't have a problem with, it also shows that a breeder doing this does not pass on previous dogs for new ones, (which I know many do, but it is another pet hate of mine)

The breeders Kennel name is preserved, and the stud is hopefully chosen by the breeder also, this is a positive way for a breeder to continue good lines and good pups. And not just about monetary rewards.

:)

Hi

That is what it probably is. As she is only wanting her dog as a pet she probably didnt listen to all the other stuff. She has nothing but praise for the breeder and at one point was going back to her for another dog but decided time wasnt right for two dogs. She thinks it is ok for the breeder to get some money back from a litter as it was her hard work in the first place so why shouldnt she get something back from it.

Although I would never say to my neighbour the dog in my opinion is not very good. I had a friend years ago that bred the same breed and did very well with them and they are like chalk and cheese. I do wonder if the breeder knew this when she sold it as a pet so putting so many restrictions on it.

But my original point was would any contract like this be legally binding, Would it have to be seen by a lawyer to be so?

Wendy

Wendy the question has been answered :-) If the dog was sold out right then no there is no legal right.

THat should have read DIDNT reply..

Sorry have not heard of this ruling.

Do know many people who have bought bitches, who have signed a contract but thinking that once they have done all the health tests etc. that they will be able to breed, but they haven't read the contract properly and have been well and truly stung, especially when they've done all the health tests that they were verbally told was all that was needed.

I think too many people don't get the contracts before the day of purchase, so don't get to read the little wording and then when the time comes get told in no uncertain terms that they can't be bred from.  Even though the breeder has been told that they may be interested in breeding from the pup later on.  They are too excited on the day to take things in properly.

There are some good breeders out there who are definitely looking out for their breed but I think that there are others who are looking out for number 1

THIS IS WHY I ALWAYS E-MAIL MY CONTRACT TO INTERESTED PARTIES AFTER THE FIRST VISIT OR GIVE IT TO THEM IF I'M HAPPY ENOUGH AT THE FIRST VISIT SO THAT THEY CAN READ IT THROUGH AND KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IS REQUIRED FROM THEM.

Perhaps you'll eventually trace your original source and be able to enlighten us all.
regards, Teri
if I can,I certainly will.
reply to perrodeagua
nobody sensible wants people to sign without really understanding, they will only go away and rubbish you.
you do have a duty to make things plain.

I'd just like to point out. If you put a breeding endorsement on a puppy, it doesn't mean that the puppy can't later be used for breeding, it just means that any progeny can't be registered with the Kennel Club.

Many first timers though even people in the know have been known to sign for things that they didn't fully read, I've seen a few !!