Helen Karpouzos

The appellant appealed the removal of her twelve cats and a statement of account for boarding and veterinary fees under the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act.

The cats were removed after the appellant failed to comply with an order to clean and ventilate her apartment to eliminate a strong ammonia odour.

The Animal Care Review Board found that the inspector had reasonable grounds to issue the compliance order and that the appellant failed to comply, justifying the removal.

The Board declined to return the cats, finding they would be in distress if returned due to the ongoing unsanitary conditions.

The statement of account was varied to remove an emergency veterinary fee, as there was no evidence the cats required urgent care.

The appellant appealed a Statement of Account issued by the Chief Animal Welfare Inspector for the costs of caring for two horses removed from his property.

The appellant argued he should not be liable for costs after October 19, 2020, claiming one horse was healthy enough to be returned then.

The Animal Care Review Board found the appellant's claims speculative and confirmed the Statement of Account, ordering the appellant to pay $5,132.26 for the costs of care.

The appellant requested a reconsideration of a Board decision that upheld a compliance order and the removal of her dog under the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act.

The appellant argued that the Board violated procedural fairness by failing to ensure fulsome disclosure, denying an adjournment, failing to provide instructions for a written hearing, and making a decision without a hearing.

The Board dismissed the request, finding that the appellant had received disclosure, refused an offered adjournment, was provided clear instructions in a prior order, and failed to participate in the written hearing after refusing to cooperate in the teleconference hearing.