Dog Bites and Pet Attacks in Kuwait: Who Is Liable for the Injury and How to Claim Compensation

A practical guide for victims of dog bites and pet attacks in Kuwait: the custodian's presumed liability under the Civil Code and the external-cause defence, special cases involving children, compounds, chalets and strays, and how to gather evidence, report and claim compensation.

The number of dogs, cats and other pets kept in Kuwaiti homes, residential compounds, chalets, farms and livestock pens keeps growing, and so does the number of incidents in which an adult or a child is bitten by a dog, scratched by a cat, or knocked down by an animal that slipped away from its owner in a building corridor, a public park or on the beach. Victims often leave the scene unsure whether they have any legal right at all, or assume it was simply bad luck that ends with a trip to the emergency room. In fact, the Civil Code attaches clear liability to whoever had the animal in their custody.

This article is devoted to that practical angle: the person bitten or attacked by a pet, who is liable for the injury, and how to claim compensation. It does not repeat the general theory of custodian liability for things, which we covered in Liability for Things and Animals under Kuwaiti Law and Liability for Things under the Kuwaiti Civil Code, nor the general rules on assessing damages set out in Compensation for Physical and Moral Harm under the Kuwaiti Civil Code. Instead, it applies those rules to the everyday situations people actually ask about.

We explain who the "custodian" of the animal is, why the custodian's liability is presumed so that the victim need not prove fault, what defences the owner can raise, how the picture changes in public places, residential compounds and chalets, how dangerous and wild animals are treated, and what happens when the victim is a child, when the victim provoked the animal, or when the damage is to a car or another animal. We also cover stray animals and the liability of public bodies, medical treatment and evidence, reporting and the criminal side, the heads of compensation for physical and psychological harm, and the role of insurance.

The Short Answer

If you are bitten by a dog or attacked by a pet in Kuwait, the starting point is that the person liable to compensate you is the animal's custodian: whoever had actual control of it at the time, usually the owner. Under the Kuwaiti Civil Code (Decree-Law No. 67 of 1980) that liability is presumed. You do not have to prove negligence; it is enough to prove that the animal caused your injury and that it was in the custody of the person you are claiming against.

The custodian does not escape liability by showing that he was careful, or that his dog "is friendly and has never bitten anyone". He escapes only by proving an external cause: an unforeseeable and irresistible event, the victim's own fault (for example, provoking the animal or entering a closed yard), or the fault of a third party that was the real cause of the attack. The victim's fault may reduce compensation rather than eliminate it, depending on how far it contributed to the harm as assessed by the court.

In practice: get treatment immediately and keep the medical report, photograph the injury and the scene, identify the owner, gather witnesses and any video before it is overwritten, file a report where there is clear negligence or a serious injury, then claim medical costs, lost earnings, pain, scarring and psychological harm, through a written settlement, a civil claim attached to the criminal case, or an independent civil action, keeping limitation periods in mind.

The Legislative Framework

Kuwait has no standalone "dog bite law". The rules are spread across several complementary instruments:

The Civil Code (Decree-Law No. 67 of 1980): the basis for compensation. It governs tort liability generally and contains a specific rule making the custodian of an animal liable for the harm it causes, even if the animal strayed or escaped, unless he proves the harm resulted from an external cause beyond his control. It also governs the liability of a principal for his employees, the heads of material and moral damages, and limitation.
The Penal Code (No. 16 of 1960): covers injury caused by negligence, recklessness, lack of precaution or breach of regulations, as well as intentional assault. A person who lets an aggressive dog roam a public place may face liability for negligent injury, while someone who deliberately sets a dog on another person is treated as having assaulted him using the animal as a weapon.
The Criminal Procedure Code (No. 17 of 1960): governs complaints, investigation, and the injured party's right to bring a civil claim before the criminal court.
The Civil and Commercial Procedure Code (No. 38 of 1980): governs independent civil actions, the appointment of experts and doctors, and enforcement.
Administrative rules on animals: competent authorities, notably the Public Authority for Agriculture Affairs and Fish Resources, veterinary services, the Municipality and environmental bodies, regulate keeping, vaccinating and licensing certain animals and dealing with strays. These rules, together with environmental and wildlife protection legislation, restrict keeping wild and predatory animals. Details change from time to time, so check the current version with the competent authority before relying on it.

Breaching an administrative rule, such as failing to vaccinate a dog or keeping a prohibited animal, is not a condition of civil liability: the custodian is liable even if fully compliant. But where a breach exists it strengthens the victim's evidence and may open administrative or criminal proceedings.

A single incident can therefore produce three parallel tracks: a civil track for compensation, a criminal track for punishment where negligence or intent is proven, and an administrative track concerning the animal itself. None necessarily depends on the others, although a final criminal judgment binds the civil court on the occurrence of the act and its attribution to the perpetrator.

The Substantive Rules

1. Who is the "custodian" of the animal?

Liability follows custody, not ownership. The custodian is whoever has actual power of use, direction and control over the animal for his own account. The owner is presumed to be the custodian, but that presumption can be rebutted if actual control genuinely passed to someone else.

An owner who keeps the animal at home is the custodian, even if a family member was walking it at the time.
A domestic worker or driver walking the dog usually does not become custodian, being an employee acting for the household and under its direction. Custody stays with the owner, who may also be liable as principal, as explained in Liability for the Acts of Others under Kuwaiti Law.
A pet hotel, trainer or borrower may acquire custody if it independently controls the animal for its own account during that period, subject to the court's assessment of the relationship.
A veterinary clinic during treatment may be examined as the party in control if the animal injures staff or visitors while in its care.
A stolen animal: custody normally passes to the thief, since the owner lost control involuntarily.
An animal that escaped or strayed: custody does not end merely because it got loose; escape is precisely the loss of control that presumed liability is designed to cover.
Shared animals: where several people jointly control an animal, such as partners in a farm, they may be jointly liable depending on the evidence of shared custody.

2. Why is liability "presumed", and what must the victim prove?

The legislature based the custodian's liability on presumed fault in custody, because animals can behave unpredictably and whoever chooses to keep and benefit from one bears the consequences. The victim need not prove that the owner left the gate open or failed to use a lead. It is enough to prove:

the harm: physical injury, property damage or psychological harm;
the animal's active role in causing it: biting, scratching, jumping, knocking down, or chasing the victim so that he fell;
that the animal was in the defendant's custody at the time.

Physical contact is not required. Someone chased by a dog who falls and breaks an arm, or a cyclist who swerves into a wall when a dog lunges at him, may be compensated if the dog's charge caused the fall. Where the animal was lying still in its normal place and someone tripped over it, whether its role was "active" may be disputed, and the court has wide discretion.

The rule covers all owned animals, not only dogs: cats, horses in stables and riding schools, camels and sheep that wander onto the road from farms, birds of prey and reptiles. The practical picture differs, but the legal rule is the same.

3. Rebutting liability by an external cause

Showing ordinary care is not enough. The custodian must prove an external cause, of which there are three forms:

Force majeure: an unforeseeable and irresistible event. It is rare in pet cases, because an animal becoming agitated, escaping or being startled by a loud noise is foreseeable and falls within custody.
The victim's fault: hitting or teasing the animal, reaching for a tethered dog despite a warning, or climbing into a fenced yard with a warning sign. If it was the sole cause, liability may be excluded; if it contributed alongside the presumed fault, compensation is reduced proportionately.
A third party's fault: someone deliberately opening the animal's cage, or a passer-by provoking a dog that then attacks someone else. The third party's fault must be the effective cause and one the custodian could not foresee or avoid.

The burden is on the custodian. An owner's claim that the victim "came too close" is not enough on its own; he must show that this was genuine fault rather than the natural conduct of someone using a public road or shared corridor.

4. Dogs in public places, residential compounds and chalets

Public places: beaches, parks, walkways and squares are where children, passers-by and other animals are expected. A dog off the lead or not under adequate control strengthens the victim's case and may ground criminal liability for negligence. Authorities and managers of some facilities and malls impose their own conditions on animals, and breaching them is practical evidence of fault.

Residential compounds and buildings: the primary liability lies with the custodian. It may extend to the compound management or landlord if the dog is the compound's own guard dog, or if management received earlier complaints about an aggressive animal and did nothing it could have done under the compound rules or lease. Keeping animals in rented property is essentially a contractual matter between landlord and tenant. For persistent nuisance such as constant barking without injury, see Neighbour Noise Nuisance in Kuwait.

Rented chalets and rest houses: if the dog belongs to the landlord or a resident guard and attacks the tenant or guests, the custodian is liable, and the landlord may also be liable for the safety of the premises and for failing to warn. If the tenant brings his own dog and it injures a worker, visitor or neighbour, the tenant is the custodian. See Short-Term Rentals in Kuwait: Furnished Apartments, Chalets and the Owner's Liability.

Farms, livestock pens and stables: farm guard dogs are often left loose. That is acceptable within closed, fenced boundaries, but creates clear liability if they get onto the road or attack a visitor who entered with permission. With horses at riding schools, custodian liability may overlap with the school's contractual duties to its trainee.

5. Dangerous and wild animals

Keeping wild or predatory animals such as lions, tigers, wolves or venomous reptiles is very different from keeping a cat or a house dog. The rules applied in Kuwait impose strict restrictions on such animals, which may amount to prohibition or to special licensing and housing and safety conditions depending on the species and the authority. We deliberately cite no specific text or decision here, because these requirements change and must be verified with the competent authority.

On the civil side, the victim's position is stronger: the danger is known in advance, so the custodian can hardly argue that the attack was sudden or that the cage seemed secure. If keeping the animal was itself unlawful, that supports a finding of negligence on the criminal side and may lead to administrative measures such as confiscation, in addition to damages.

The same logic applies, to a lesser degree, to dog breeds known for strength and aggression. The Civil Code does not distinguish between breeds for liability, but the breed's known nature, the dog's history and its training all influence the criminal assessment of negligence and any claim that the victim was at fault.

6. When the victim is a child

Children are the most frequent victims of dog bites, often to the face, neck and hands, and the physical and psychological effects can be long-lasting. The guardian claims on the child's behalf; the child is entitled to compensation for physical and moral harm, and the parents may recover their own losses such as treatment costs and time off work to accompany the child.

Owners often argue that the child provoked the dog or pulled its tail. A young child lacking discernment cannot commit "fault" in the full sense applied to an adult, although the court may consider whether those responsible for supervising the child fell short when apportioning liability. An older child's conduct may be weighed according to his understanding. These are questions of fact for the court.

In assessing a child's compensation, courts consider the effect of a scar on the child's future, the likely need for further cosmetic surgery as the child grows, and documented trauma. If the injury happened in a commercial venue, it may overlap with the occupier liability discussed in Injury in a Mall, Shop or Restaurant in Kuwait.

7. Damage to property or to another animal

Liability is not limited to personal injury. If a dog scratches a car, ruins a neighbour's garden or furniture in a rented flat, kills someone's cat or bird, or runs in front of a car and causes an accident, the same rules apply. Compensation covers the value of the injured or dead animal, veterinary costs, repair costs and any loss of use.

Where two dogs belonging to different owners fight, the court examines which was the aggressor and how each custodian behaved, including whether either dog was off the lead, and may apportion liability. An owner injured while separating the dogs may also recover, subject to the circumstances of his intervention.

8. Stray animals and the liability of public bodies

Stray dogs are a recurring complaint in some areas. Where a stray has no known owner, there is no identifiable "custodian". The question then becomes whether the authority responsible for controlling strays is liable. The general rule is that the administration answers for its own fault where a specific failure is proven, for example repeated reports of a known danger at a specific location with no action taken, directly leading to the harm. That is not easy to prove and depends on documented prior reports. The competent court and route of claim depend on the nature of the case, so it should be studied before filing.

If a dog that looks like a stray is in fact fed, sheltered and treated as their own by someone, or is a guard dog left loose at a construction site or farm, custody may be attributed to whoever actually controls it. It is worth asking locally: whose dog is it, who feeds it, and where does it sleep?

Preventively, documented reports of dangerous strays to the competent authority serve public safety and may later be the very evidence that proves a failure to act.

9. The criminal side where there is negligence

The civil claim (compensation) is independent of the criminal case (punishment). Presumed civil liability can exist without any offence, because criminal liability requires actual proof of fault. Examples of negligence that may come before investigators include letting a known aggressive dog roam, walking it off the lead in a crowded place, leaving the gate open knowing the dog is aggressive, or keeping a predatory animal without precautions. Deliberately setting an animal on someone, or using it to threaten and intimidate, is a more serious intentional offence. We discussed offences of bodily harm in Homicide and Assault Offences in Kuwaiti Law.

We do not cite specific penalties or fines here; the criminal characterisation depends on the severity of the injury, the period of incapacity and the circumstances, and is for the investigating authorities and the court.

10. Heads of compensation for physical and psychological harm

Material loss: ambulance and treatment costs, vaccinations, surgery, physiotherapy, scar revision, medicines, transport, lost earnings during incapacity, and reduced future earning capacity if a permanent disability remains.
Bodily harm itself: the violation of physical integrity, visible disfigurement, and partial or total disability, usually assessed with a forensic medical report or a court-appointed doctor.
Moral and psychological harm: pain, fright and suffering, phobia of animals, the effect of facial scarring particularly on children, and medically documented psychological disorder. See Compensation for Moral Damage under Kuwaiti Law.
Certain future loss: such as cosmetic surgery that is medically certain rather than merely possible.
Damage to property and animals: as described above.

There is no fixed tariff. The court assesses compensation to make good the whole of the proven harm according to its seriousness and the victim's circumstances, and must set out its elements. For the broader principles see Civil Liability for Personal Injury and Compensation in Kuwait.

11. The role of insurance

We are not aware of any general compulsory insurance in Kuwait covering pet owners' liability. Some home insurance or personal liability policies may cover the policyholder's liability to third parties and may include or exclude harm caused by a domestic animal, depending on their wording. The victim's own health insurance may pay for treatment and then pursue the liable party under the policy terms. Either way, insurance affects only who pays, not whether the custodian is liable. Ask the owner for his policy details if any, and check your own.

Principles Settled by the Court of Cassation

The Court of Cassation has consistently held that custody giving rise to liability for animals and things rests on actual control of use, direction and supervision, and that it presumptively belongs to the owner unless shown to have passed to another.
It has likewise held that this liability rests on presumed fault that is not rebutted by showing due care, and is displaced only by an external cause: force majeure, the victim's fault or a third party's fault.
It is settled that an employee who handles a thing on his principal's behalf and under his direction does not become its custodian; custody remains with the principal.
It is also settled that assessing compensation lies within the trial court's discretion provided it gives sound reasons and identifies the elements of harm, and that moral harm is compensable as material harm is.
The trial court may determine the victim's fault and its contribution to the harm, and reduce compensation accordingly or exclude liability where it was the sole cause.
A final criminal judgment binds the civil court on matters it necessarily decided concerning the occurrence of the act and its attribution to the perpetrator.

Methodological note: these principles are stated in general terms as settled in the case law of the Kuwaiti Court of Cassation and in civil law scholarship. We do not cite appeal numbers or dates, as precise citation requires the official law reports. Their application varies with the facts and evidence of each case and should not be relied on without a review of the specific case.

Practical Steps and Documents

Immediately after the incident

Treatment first: go to the nearest clinic or emergency department immediately, even if the bite seems minor. Animal bites and scratches carry a risk of infection, and the doctor will decide on vaccinations or other measures under approved health protocols. Do not rely on the owner's assurance that the dog is vaccinated.
Medical report: ask for a report describing the injury, its cause and date, and keep every invoice, prescription, sick note and follow-up appointment.
Photographs: photograph the injury at once and as it heals, the scene, the animal if safely possible, and any torn clothing or belongings.
Identify the animal and owner: note the owner's name, phone number and address, the animal's type and colour, and ask about its vaccination status.
Witnesses: take names and numbers of those present; their evidence is key if the owner denies the incident or alleges provocation.
Video: quickly ask the compound, shop or neighbours to preserve camera footage before it is overwritten. See Kuwait's Security Camera Law.
Messages: keep any message in which the owner apologises or offers to pay; it may evidence the incident and his ownership.

Reporting

If the injury is serious, negligence is obvious, or the owner will not cooperate, file a report at the competent police station, which refers the matter to the competent investigating authority according to its classification. A report documents the incident officially and helps identify the owner; the victim may be referred to forensic medicine to assess the injury, treatment period and any disability. You can also notify the veterinary or animal authority if the animal is dangerous, unvaccinated or a repeat attacker.

Routes to compensation

Amicable settlement: many minor cases end with a written agreement covering treatment costs and an agreed sum. Make it clear whether the settlement is full or partial, and do not sign a final release before your medical condition has stabilised.
Civil claim before the criminal court: if criminal proceedings are brought, you can claim compensation within them. See Civil Claims before the Criminal Court in Kuwait.
Independent civil action: the natural route where there is no criminal case, or where several parties such as the owner, the compound and the principal are sued, relying on presumed liability without proof of fault.

Limitation

Tort claims are subject to limitation periods under the Civil Code, which generally run from when the victim learns of the harm and of the person responsible, subject to a long-stop period from the date of the act, and are affected by pending criminal proceedings. Do not delay. See Limitation in Kuwaiti Law.

Document checklist

Medical and emergency reports, and any forensic medical report.
Invoices for treatment, medicines, physiotherapy and cosmetic procedures.
Sick notes and an employer's letter confirming salary and days absent.
Photographs of the injury, scene and animal, and video footage.
Witness names and contact details.
A copy and number of the police report and any investigation records.
Correspondence with the owner, compound management or landlord, and any earlier complaints.
Insurance policy details, if any.
For property or animal damage: repair or veterinary invoices and proof of the animal's value.

On the weight of each type of evidence, see Evidence in Civil and Commercial Matters in Kuwait.

Hypothetical Cases

Case 1: A bite in the building corridor

Hypothetical facts: A resident stepped out of her flat and her neighbour's dog, being walked off the lead by the domestic worker, rushed at her and bit her leg. She was taken to the emergency department, received the necessary preventive treatment, missed several days of work and was left with a visible scar. The neighbour offered to pay only the emergency bill.

Legal analysis: The custodian is the dog's owner, not the worker, who acts for him and under his direction. His liability is presumed; the victim need only prove the bite and his ownership. Compensation covers all treatment, not just the emergency bill, plus lost days, the scar, and the pain and fright. Walking the dog off the lead in a shared corridor may also support criminal liability for negligent injury.

Case 2: A child at a rented chalet

Hypothetical facts: A family rented a chalet for a day. The chalet guard kept a dog tied near his room without telling the tenants. A five-year-old approached to play with it and was bitten on the face, needing stitches, and doctors expect later cosmetic surgery.

Legal analysis: The resident guard appears to be the custodian, though the court may ask whether the dog was kept to guard the chalet for the landlord, making the landlord custodian; the landlord may also answer for failing to secure the premises and warn the tenants. The argument that the child approached the dog is weak against a child without discernment, although parental supervision may be considered. Facial disfigurement in a child and medically certain future surgery weigh heavily in the award.

Case 3: The man who provoked the dog

Hypothetical facts: A young man saw a dog tethered inside a walled yard displaying a "Beware of the guard dog" sign, climbed over the wall to take photos with it, was attacked, and then claimed compensation from the homeowner.

Legal analysis: The owner is the custodian but can plead the victim's fault: entering a walled property without permission despite a clear warning. The court may find this the sole cause and exclude liability, or a contributing cause and reduce the award. The position would be entirely different had the dog got out onto the street or had the wall been low enough for it to clear.

Comparison: Who Is Liable in Each Situation

House dog handled by its owner: the owner as custodian; main defences are the victim's or a third party's fault.
Dog walked by a domestic worker or driver: the householder, as custodian and principal; the employee's fault is no excuse.
Animal at a pet hotel or with a trainer: custody may pass to the host during that period, depending on the facts.
Animal at a veterinary clinic: the clinic may be examined as the party in control at the time.
Stolen animal: custody usually passes to the thief.
Owned animal that escaped or strayed: the owner remains custodian and liable.
Guard dog of a compound, farm or site: whoever actually controls it, possibly jointly with the owner or management.
Landlord's dog at a chalet: the dog's custodian, possibly with the landlord for the safety of the premises.
Wild or prohibited animal: its custodian, in a weaker position because the danger is known, with possible administrative and criminal consequences.
Ownerless stray: no identifiable custodian; the competent authority may be examined where a specific failure is proven.
Damage to a car or another animal: the custodian of the animal that caused it, under the same rules.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do I have to prove the owner was negligent?

Not for the civil claim. The custodian's liability is presumed; you prove the animal caused the harm and was in the defendant's custody. Criminal liability does require proof of fault.

The owner says his dog has never bitten anyone. Does that help him?

No. The animal's past behaviour does not excuse the custodian; only an external cause does.

The bite was minor. Is a claim worth it?

You are entitled to treatment costs and compensation for pain even for a minor injury, but whether it is worth pursuing varies. Many minor cases end in a written settlement.

Do I need a police report to claim?

It is not a condition of a civil action, but it greatly helps to document the incident and identify the owner, and is practically essential for serious injuries.

What if I do not know who owns the dog?

Ask neighbours and the compound guard, check camera footage, and file a report so the authorities can identify the owner. A civil claim needs a known defendant.

Is the compound or landlord liable for a resident's dog?

Primarily the custodian is liable. The compound or landlord may be liable if the dog belongs to it, or if a specific failure is proven despite knowledge of the danger.

My son teased the dog. Have we lost our claim?

Not necessarily. A young child's conduct is not judged as an adult's; the court may consider parental supervision and reduce or maintain the award depending on the facts.

Does compensation cover psychological harm and fear of dogs?

Yes. Moral and psychological harm is compensable, and a medical or psychological report documenting it and its persistence strengthens the claim.

A neighbour's dog killed my cat. Can I claim?

Yes. An owned animal is property; compensation covers its value and any veterinary costs, as proven before the court.

Is the state liable for a stray dog bite?

Not automatically. The competent authority's liability may be examined where a specific failure is proven, such as documented earlier reports that went unanswered. These cases need careful study.

Must dog owners carry insurance?

We are not aware of any general compulsory insurance for pet owners' liability in Kuwait, but some home or personal liability policies may provide cover depending on their terms.

I own the dog and an incident happened. What should I do?

Help the injured person get treatment, provide the dog's vaccination details, do not commit to sums in writing before understanding your position, notify your insurer if you have a policy, and take legal advice before signing any settlement.

Is there a deadline for claiming?

Yes. Tort claims are subject to limitation periods under the Civil Code, generally running from knowledge of the harm and the person responsible, so act promptly.

Conclusion

A dog bite or pet attack is not a trivial mishap in Kuwaiti law. It gives rise to presumed civil liability on the animal's custodian, who cannot escape it by showing care, only by proving an external cause. That puts victims in a stronger legal position than many realise.

A strong position still needs good evidence: an early medical report, photographs, witnesses, footage preserved in time, and a clear identification of who controlled the animal. The circumstances of each case, from the victim's conduct to the place and the type of animal, affect how liability is shared and how much compensation is awarded.

For pet owners the message is the mirror image: a lead, vaccinations, secure fencing, a warning sign, compliance with the authorities' requirements and suitable insurance are not minor details. They protect others and protect you from potentially costly liability.

Legal Notice

This article is general legal information on Kuwaiti law and does not constitute legal advice or create any relationship between the reader and the firm. Its contents are subject to legislative amendment and to judicial application to the facts of each case, and administrative requirements on animals are subject to updates by the competent authorities.

If you or your child have been bitten or attacked by an animal, or you are a pet owner facing a claim, the team at Yumnaak Law Firm reviews the facts, identifies the liable parties, and handles the police report, the civil claim within criminal proceedings or an independent action, or settlement negotiations. Contact us or book an appointment to review your case.