Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Human/Animal Relationships in Transformation pp 363–401Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Animal Law: What Is Left to be Said by the Law About Animals

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: The Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series ((PMAES))

Abstract

The Law has concerned itself little with animals. Until recent times the treatment of animals was a residual element for legal frameworks, in contrast with the vivid interest from thought, history, art and culture that has always aroused the human-animal relationship. The elements that have contributed to the inversion of this situation can be summarily enumerated: an advance in Animal Welfare Sciences, a change of mentality by a society that is increasingly more sensitive to animal suffering, and the need to regulate new forms of relations between humans and animals, within the context of a global society. This contribution will subject the changes introduced by the Law regarding the treatment of animals, in various geographical areas and in different forms, to critical review. It will analyse the influences of the “animal turn” in legal studies, especially as animal sentience seems to have erected itself the backbone for the changing processes undergone by Animal Law in recent decades, essentially, the De-objectification of animals, the Constitutionalisation of animals and the Globalisation of animals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alexandridis, Annetta, Markus Wild, and Lorenz Winkler-Horacek. 2008. Mensch und Tier in Der Antike Grenzziehung und Grenzüberschreitung. Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allgemeines Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch. https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=10001622.

  • Alonso García, Enrique. 2010. El bienestar de los animales como seres sensibles-sentientes: su valor como principio general, de rango constitucional, en el derecho español. In Los principios generales del derecho administrativo, ed. Juan Alfonso Santamaria Pastor, 1427–1510. España: La Ley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ammann, Christoph, Birgit Christensen, Lorenz Engi, and Margot Michel, eds. 2015. Würde der Kreatur. Ethische und rechtliche Beiträge zu einem unbestimmten Konzept. Zürich/Basel/Genf: Schulthess.

    Google Scholar 

  • Animal Welfare Act (United Kingdom). www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/45/contents.

  • Antoine, Susanne. 2005. Rapport sur le régime juridique de l’animal. http://www.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/var/storage/rapports-publics/054000297.pdf.

  • Assemblée Nationale. Amendement no. 59 du 11 avril 2014 (présenté par M. Glavany et al.). http://www.assembleenationale.fr/14/amendements/1808/AN/59.asp.

  • Augsberg, Steffen. 2016. Der Anthropozentrismus des juristischen Personenbegrifs—Ausdruck überkommener (religiöser) Traditionen, speziesistischer Engführung oder funktionaler Notwendigkeit? Rechtwissenschaft 3: 338ff.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartholomäi, Reinhard. 1997. Sustainable Development und Völkerrecht. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blattner, Charlotte E. 2019. Protecting Animals Within and Across Borders. Extraterritorial Jurisdiction and the Challenges of Globalization. New York: OUP USA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bodson, Liliane. 1997. Le témoignage de Pline l’Ancien sur la conception romaine de l’animal. In L’animal dans l’Antiquité, ed. Barbara Cassin, Jean-Louis Labarrière, and Gilbert Romeyer, 325–354. Paris: Vrin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boisseau-Sowinski, Lucille. 2013. La désappropriation de l’animal. Limoges: Presse Universitaire de Limoges.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boudou, Bénédicte. 2016. Montaigne et les animaux. Paris: Léo Schee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brambell, Roger. 1965. Report of the Technical Committee to Enquire into the Welfare of Animals kept under intensive Livestock Husbandry System. London: Her majesty’s Stationary Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, Susanne. 2003. Tierschutz in der Verfassung—und was nun? Die Bedeutung des neuen Art 20a GG. DÖV 56 (12): 488–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brels, Sabine. 2017. Le droit du bien-être animal dans le monde. Evolution et universalisation. Paris: L’Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, Andreas. 2012. Die Würde des Lebens. Vom Selbstsein der Tiere. In Animal Law—Tier und Recht. Entwicklungen und Perspektiven im 21. Jahrhundert, ed. Margot Michel, Daniela Kühne, and Julia Hänni, 53–67. Zürich: Dike Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brönnecke, Tobias. 1999. Umweltverfassungsrecht. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brozek, Bartorz. 2017. The Troublesome ‘Person’. In Legal Personhood: Animals, Artificial Intelligence and the Unborn, ed. Visa A.J. Kurki and Tomasz Pietrzykowski, 3–13. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53462-6.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bubnoff, Daniela. 2001. Der Schutz der künftigen Generationen im deutschen Umweltrecht: Leitbilder, Grundsätze und Instrumente eines dauerhaten Umweltschutzes. Berlin: Schmidt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bundesverfassung der Schweizerischen Eidgenossenschaft. https://www.admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/19995395/index.html.

  • Bundesverfassungsgesetz über die Nachhaltigkeit, den Tierschutz, den umfassenden Umweltschutz, die Sicherstellung der Wasser- und Lebensmittelversorgung und die Forschung. https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=20008504.

  • Burgat, Florence. 2002. La “dignité de l’animal”: Une intrusión dans la métaphysique du propre de l’homme. L’Homme. Revue Française d’Anthropologie 161: 197–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch. http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/index.html.

  • Calliess, Christian. 2001. Rechtsstaat und Umweltstaat. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Gordon Lindsay. 2014. The Oxford Handbook of Animals in Classical Thought and Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, Rachel. 1962. Silent Spring. Cambridge MA: The Riverside Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caspar, Johannes, and Michael W. Schröter. 2003. Das Staatsziel Tierschutz in Art. 20a GG. Germany: Deutscher Tierschutzbund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Code Civil. https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCode.do?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070721.

  • Código Civil. https://boe.gob.es/legislacion/codigos/codigo.php?id=34&modo=1&nota=0&tab=2.

  • Código Civil. http://www.pgdlisboa.pt/leis/lei_mostra_articulado.php?nid=775&tabela=leis.

  • Cohen, Carl, and Tom Regan. 2001. The Animal Rights Debate. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Correia Mendonça, Helena. 2018. Recognising Sentience in the Portuguese Civil Code. dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 8 (2): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council Decision 1999/575/EC of 23 March 1998 Concerning the Conclusion by the Community of the European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals used for Experimental and other Scientific Purposes: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:31999D0575&from=ES.

  • De Baggis, Gustavo. 2017. Arturo, Sandra, Poli y Cecilia: cuatro casos paradigmaticos de la jurisprudencia argentina. dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 8 (3): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Fontenay, Elisabeth. 1998. Le silence des bêtes. Paris: Fayard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Decision 2015-710 DC on 12th February 2015. https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/decision/2015/2015710DC.htm.

  • Diario da Republica 1ª Serie, N°45, de 3 de Março de 2017. https://dre.pt/web/guest/home/-/dre/106549655/details/maximized.

  • Dierauer, Urs. 1977. Tier und Mensch in Denken der Antike. Studien zur Tierpsychologie, Anthropologie und Ethik. Amsterdam: B. R. Grüne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the Protection of Animals Used for Scientific Purposes. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32010L0063.

  • Driessen, Bart. 2017. Fundamental Animal Rights in European Law. European Public Law 23 (3): 547–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisen, Jessica. 2017. Animals in the Constitutional State. I•CON 15 (4): 909–954. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mox088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engels, Friedrich. 1845. Die Lage der arbeitenden Klassen in England. Leipzig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epiney, Astrid. 2005. Umweltrecht in Europäischen Union. Köln/Berlin/München: Carl Heymanns Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Union. 2012. Consolidated Version of the Treaty of the European Union. Official Journal of the European Union, October 26. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A12012E%2FTXT.

  • Faller, Rico. 2005. Staatsziel “Tierschutz”: vom parlamentarischen Gesetzgebungsstaat zuverfassungsgerichtlichen Jurisdiktionsstaat? Berlin: Humblot.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Favre, David. 2004. Integrating Animal Interests into Our Legal System. Animal Law 87: 87–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. The Gathering Momentum. Journal of Animal Law 1: 1 ss.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Living Property: A New Status for Animals within the Legal System. Marquette Law Review 93: 1021–1025.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAWC. 1979. Five Freedoms. https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20121010012427/http://www.fawc.org.uk/freedoms.htm.

  • Fielenbach, Martin. 2005. Die Notwendigkeit der Aufnahme des Tierschutzes in das Grundgesetz. Germany: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Filip-Fröschl, Johanna. 1994. Rechtshistorische Würzeln der Behandlung des Tieres durch das geltende Privatrecht. In Tierschutz und Recht, ed. Friedrich Harrer and Georg Graf, 21–35. Vienna: Orac.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francione, Gary. 1995. Animals, Property and the Law. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2000. Introduction to Animal Rights: Your Child or the Dog? Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, David. 2008. Understanding Animal Welfare. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/1751-0147-50-S1-S1.

  • Gai.2,14-16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giglio, Francesco. 2012. Pandectism and the Gaian Classification of Things. The University of Toronto Law Journal 62 (1): 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilhus, Ingvild Saelid. 2006. Animals, Gods and Humans. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Giménez-Candela, Teresa. 2015. Estatuto jurídico de los animales: aspectos comparados. In El Derecho de los animales, ed. Basilio Baltasar, 149–183. Madrid: Marcial Pons.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. Reforma del Cc. de Portugal: los animales como seres sintientes. dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 7 (4): 1–4. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017a. The De-objectification of Animals (I). dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 8 (2). https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.318.

  • ———. 2017b. The De-objectification of Animals (II). dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 8 (3). https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.250.

  • Giménez-Candela, Marita. 2018a. Dignidad, Sentiencia, Personalidad. Relación jurídica humano-animal. dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 9 (2): 5–28. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018b. La Descosificación de los animales en el Cc. Español. dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 9 (3): 7–47. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2019a. Animales en el Código civil español: una reforma interrumpida. dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 10 (2): 7–18. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2019b. Transición animal en España. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goetschel, Antoine. 1989. Tierschutz und Grundrechte. Zürich: Diss.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gontier, Thierry. 2007. Intelligence et vertus animales: Montaigne lecteur de la zoologie antique. Rursus 2. https://doi.org/10.4000/rursus.115.

  • Government of India, Ministry of Environment & Forests, F. No. 20-1/2010-CZA(M) Date: 17.05.2013. http://www.moef.nic.in/assets/ban%20on%20dolphanariums.pdf.

  • Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/index.html.

  • Guichet, Jean-Luc. 2006. Rousseau, L’animal et l’homme. L’animalité dans l’horizon anthropologique des Lumières. Paris: Cerf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadjyianni, Ioanna. 2019. The Court of Justice of the European Union as a Transnational Actor Through Judicial Review of the Territorial Scope on the EU Environmental Law. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 21: 128–161. https://doi.org/10.1017/cel.2019.4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, Ruth. 1964. Animal Machines: The new Factory Farming Industry. Foreword by Rachel Carsson. London: CABI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasso, Hofmann. 2001. Umweltsstaat: Bewahrung der natürlichen Lebensgrundlagen und Schutz vor den Gefahren und Risiken von Wissenschaft und Techknik in staatlicher Verantwortung. Festschrift 50. Jahre Bundesverfassungsgericht, Band 2, 873ss.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hermand, Jost. 1991. Grüne Utopien in Deutschland. Frankfurt: Fischer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalof, Linda. 2013. A Cultural History of Animals in Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford International Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitchell, Kenneth F., Jr. 2014. Animals in the Ancient World from A to Z. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, Hans Hugo. 1991. Staatsziele im Verfasungsgesetz—Empfiehlt es sich, ein Staatsziel Umweltschutz in das Grundgesetz aufzunehmen? DVBl, 729–739.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kley-Struller, Andreas. 1995. Der Schutz der Umwelt durch die Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention. EuGRZ 22: 507ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kloepfer, Michael, Claudio Franzius, and Sigrid Reinert. 1994. Zur Geschichte des Deutschen Umweltrechts. Berlin: Humblot.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Korsgaard, Christine. 2012. A Kantian Case for Animal Rights. In Animal Law—Tier und Recht. Entwicklungen und Perspektiven im 21. Jahrhundert, ed. Margot Michel, Daniela Kühne, and Julia Hänni, 3–27. Zürich: Dike Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Bot, Olivier. 2018. Droit constitutionnel de l’animal. Wroclaw: Independent editor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lelanchon, Loic. 2018. La reforma del estatuto jurídico civil de los animales en el Derecho francés. dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 9 (3): 72–79. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marguénaud, Jean-Pierre. 2014. L’entrée en vigueur de “l’amendement Glavany”: un grand pas de plus vers la personnalité juridique des animaux. RSDA 2: 15ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meadows, Dennis L., Donella H. Meadows, Erich Zahn, and Peter Milling. 1972. Die Grenzen des Wachstums. Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlagsanstalt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menezes Cordeiro, Antonio. 2016. Tratado de Direito Civil III. Parte Geral III. Coisas. Lisboa: Ed. Almedina.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michel, Margot, and Eveline Schneider Kassayeh. 2011. The Legal Situation of Animals in Switzerland: Two Steps forward, One Step back-many Steps to go. Journal of Animal Law 7: 1–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murswieck, Dietrich. 1995. Umweltschutz als Staatszweck, 15ss. Germany: Economica Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obergfell, Eva Ines. 2016. Tiere als Mitgeschöpfte im Zivilrecht. Zwischen Rechtsobjektivität und Shadensregulierung. Rechtswissenschaft 3: 388–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Offor, Iyan. 2020. Animals and the Impact of Trade Law and Policy: A Global Animal Law Question. Transnational Environmental Law 9 (2): 239–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onida, Pietro Paolo. 2012. Studi sulla condizione degli animali non umani nel sistema giuridico romano. Torino: Giappichelli.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2015. Il problema della ‘personalità’ degli animali: l’esempio dell’orango Sandra. Roma e America. Diritto Romano Comune. 36: 360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patrao Neves, Maria do Ceu, and Ferndando Araujo, eds. 2018. Ética Aplicada. Animais. Lisboa: 70 Almedina.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, Anne. 2016a. Liberté, Egalité, Animalité. Human-Animal Comparisons in Law. Transnational Environmental Law 5 (1): 25–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016b. Tierwohl als globales Gut: Regulierungsbedarf und—chancen. Rechtswissenschaft 3: 363–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———, ed. 2019. Studies in Global Animal Law. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pluda, Martina. 2018. Animal Law in the Third Reich. Bellaterra: UAB Publication Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollo, Simone. 2016. Umani e Animali: Questioni di Etica. Rome: Carocci editore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regan, Tom. 1989. Animal Rights and Human Obligations. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2004. The Case for Animal Rights. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigné, Philippe. March 2, 2015. Les animaux et le Code civil. La semaine juridique édition générale 9: 402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reis Moreira, Alexandra. 2018. La reforma del Código civil portugués respecto al estatuto del animal. dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 9 (3): 80–91. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Requejo Conde, M. Carmen. 2015. El delito de maltrato a los animales tras la reforma del Código Penal por la Ley Orgánica 1/2015, de 30 de marzo. dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 6 (2): 1–26. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter, Dagmar. 2007. Die Würde der Kreatur. Rechtsvergleichende Betrachtungen. ZaöRV 67: 319–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ríos Corbacho, José Manuel. 2015. Comentario en relación al maltrato de animales en la nueva reforma del Código Penal español (LO 1/2015). dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 6 (2): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritvo, Harriet. 2002. History and Animal Studies. Society and Animals 10 (4): 403–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. On the Animal Turn. Daedalus 136 (4): 118–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocha Santana, Luciano. 2018. La teoría de los derechos animales de Tom Regan. Ampliando las fronteras de la comunidad moral y de los derechos más allá de lo humano. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roxin, Claus. 1966. Sinn und Grenzen Staatlicher Strafe. JuS, 377–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schink, Alexander. 1997. Umweltschutz als Staatsziel. DÖV, 221ss.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulze-Fielitz, Helmuth. 2006. Artikel 20a. In Grundgesetz Kommentar, ed. Horst Dreier, 2nd ed., 288. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweizerisches Zivilgesetzbuch. https://www.admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/19070042/index.html.

  • Serpell, James. 1996. In the Company of Animals. A Study of Human-Animal Relationship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shermaier, Martin. 2017. Dominus actuum suorum. Die willenstheoretische Begründung des Eigentums und das römische Recht. SZ 134: 49–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonin, Denis, and Andrea Gavinelli. 2019. The European Union Legislation on Animal Welfare: State of Play, Enforcement and Future Activities. In Animal Welfare: From Science to Law, ed. Sophie Hild and Louis Schweitzer, 59–70. Paris: LFDA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, Peter. 2002. Animal Liberation. New York: Ecco Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006. In Defense of Animals: The Second Wave. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sitter-Liver, Beat. 2012. Recht und Gerechtigkeit auch für Tiere. Eine konkrete Utopie. In Animal Law—Tier und Recht. Entwicklungen und Perspektiven im 21. Jahrhundert, ed. Margot Michel, Daniela Kühne, and Julia Hänni, 29–51. Zürich: Dike Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sowery, Katy. 2018. Sentient Beings and Tradable Products: The Curious Constitutional Status of Animals Under Union law. Common Market Law Review 55 (1): 55–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, Rudolf. 1988. Der Ökologische Verfassungsstaat. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streinz, Rudolf. 1993. Vorgaben des Völkerrechts für das deutsche Umweltrecht. Jahrbuch der Umwelt und Technikrechts, 319–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness. 2012. http://www.jamiegriffiths.com/the-cambridge-declaration-of-consciousness/.

  • Thiele, Felix. ed. 2001. Tierschutz als Staatsziel? Naturwissenschaftliche, rechtliche und ethische Aspekte. Graue Reihe Nr. 25 der Europäischen Akademie, Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierschutzgesetz. 2008. https://www.admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/20022103/index.html.

  • Tischler, Joyce, and Pamela Frasch. 2019. Animal Law: The next generation. Animal Law 25 (3): 303–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toynbee, Joceylin M.C. 1996. Animals in Roman Life and Art. Baltimore-London: The John Hopkins University Press Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzung-Jen, Tsai. 1996. Die Verfassungsrechtliche Umweltsschutzpflicht des Staates. Berlin: Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulpian. D.1,1,1,3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villalba, Teresa. 2015. 40 años de Bienestar Animal: 1974–2014. Madrid: MAGRAMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagman, Bruce, and Matthew Liebman. 2011. A Worldview of Animal Law. Durham NC: Carolina Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wartemberg, Marlene. 2015. Art. 13 Lisbon Treaty/TFUE—Historical, Constitutional and Legal Aspects. In Animales y Derecho, ed. David Favre and Teresa Giménez-Candela, 353–370. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westphal, Simone. 2000. Art. 20a GG—Staatsziel Umweltschutz. JuS, 339–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, Sharon, and Stephanie Rutherford. 2018. Historical Animal Geographies. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wildberger, Jula. 2008. Beast or God? The intermediate Status of Humans and the Physical Basis of the Stoic scala naturae. In Mensch und Tier in Der Antike Grenzziehung und Grenzüberschreitung, ed. Annetta Alexandridis, Markus Wild, and Lorenz Winkler-Horacek, 47–70. Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise, Steven. 2000. Rattling the Cage. Toward Legal Rights for Animals. New York: Perseus Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wohlers, Wolfgang. 2016. Tierschutz durch Strafrecht? Zur Legitimation tierschutzstrafrechtlicher Normen. Rechtswissenschaft 7 (3): 416–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wookey, Oliver. 2018a. Legislative Proposal to Increase Sentencing Powers for Cruelty to Nonhuman Animals: Taken with a Pinch of Salt. dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 9 (1): 11–17. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018b. The Effect of the Brexit on Animal Welfare in the United Kingdom: A Case for Scepticism and Scrutiny. dA. Derecho Animal (Forum of Animal Law Studies) 9 (2): 29–50. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zivilprozessordnung. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/zpo/.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank for careful reading, editing and very helpful criticism my colleagues Raffaela Cersosimo and Oliver Wookey for their help in finishing the English version of this chapter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ICALP (International Center for Animal Law and Policy), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

    Marita Giménez-Candela

Authors
  1. Marita Giménez-Candela
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Behavioural Sciences and Mental Health, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy

    Augusto Vitale

  2. Department of Philosophy, Sapienza Università di Roma, Rome, Italy

    Simone Pollo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Giménez-Candela, M. (2022). Animal Law: What Is Left to be Said by the Law About Animals. In: Vitale, A., Pollo, S. (eds) Human/Animal Relationships in Transformation. The Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85277-1_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation