Woman convicted by Surrey judge of harming pony loses higher court petition
Published 11:20 am Wednesday, April 8, 2026
A B.C. Supreme Court judge has rejected a court petition from a woman prior to her being sentenced by a Surrey provincial court judge for harming a pony, finding it to be an abuse of the court process and “collateral attack” on her conviction.
Justice Richard Fowler, in his reasons for judgment delivered in Vancouver, concluded that Marie‑Louise Felicia Allen’s 33-page petition “is, in effect” an appeal of her conviction, “albeit advanced on constitutional grounds.
“It is plain and obvious that what Ms. Allen is “in effect doing” is challenging the basis upon which she was convicted in provincial court,” Fowler found. “Ms. Allen has not yet been sentenced. After being sentenced, she will have the right to appeal her conviction. What she cannot do is, in effect, appeal her conviction through civil proceedings in the Supreme Court.”
“It is so evidently clear that Ms. Allen is attacking her conviction,” he said.
“It is well established in the case law that it is an abuse of the Court’s process to bring a civil action which attempts to collaterally challenge a criminal conviction,” Fowler noted. “As a result of the distinction between criminal proceedings and civil litigation, a party cannot seek a remedy statutorily provided for by way of an appeal through civil proceedings. Such an evasion of the criminal process is known as a collateral attack and is prohibited.”
Allen first appeared in Surrey Provincial Court on August 31, 2023, on a charge that between July 7, 2022, and Oct. 14, 2022, “being a person responsible for an animal, being a miniature pony,” caused or permitted the animal “to be or continue to be in distress.” Her Surrey trial began on Feb. 11, 2025, resulting in her conviction on Aug. 19, 2025.
Allen filed her petition on Dec. 19, 2025 against the Attorney General of British Columbia seeking a declaration that sections 11 and 12 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act infringe on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as well as a declaration that commencing or continuing prosecutions under section 24(1) of the Act violates the Charter.
She also sought a court order stating that laws permitting the seizure of sick or injured animals under the care of licensed veterinarians violate section 7 of the Charter of pet guardians; and an order pursuant to s. 24(1) of the Charter that the provincial court prosecution against her be stayed “as continuing the prosecution in light of the declaration sought in number (1) and (2) above would violate the petitioner’s s. 7 Charter rights.”
Fowler noted in his reasons for judgment that section 24(1) of the Act “is the same section Ms. Allen seeks in her petition to be declared invalid pursuant to s. 7 of the Charter.”
Allen represented herself in court.
Fowler noted that Allen in her petition alleged that veterinarians working for the BC SPCA, who are delegated pursuant to section 11 of the Act to determine if an animal is in distress, cannot seize an animal under veterinary treatment “firstly because a pet guardian who has taken an animal to a veterinarian cannot have breached the standard of care provisions of the Act, and because to seize an animal from a veterinarian’s care does not accord with principles of fundamental justice.”
The Surrey provincial court judge heard during the trial that in July 2022 two veterinarians, on consultation with a specialist, determined Allen’s miniature pony had a dislocated shoulder and possibly a humerus bone fracture.
“Ms. Allen was given treatment options, including surgery at considerable cost, manual manipulation of the shoulder back into place for considerably less cost, and finally euthanasia,” Fowler noted. “In August 2022, Ms. Allen communicated the intention to crowd‑fund for the surgical option. The treating veterinarians agreed to wait to permit Ms. Allen time to secure the funds. By the end of September 2022, Ms. Allen had not procured treatment for the pony.”
A veterinarian reported her concerns to the SPCA in early October 2022, an investigator went to Allen’s residence, observed the pony, spoke with Allen by phone and required her to confirm on Oct. 12, 2022 that it had been seen by a vet. By then, the court heard, its injury was almost three months old.
Not hearing from Allen again, the investigator got a search warrant, seized the pony on Oct. 14, 2022. Subsequently the SPCA veterinarians determined the pony’s prognosis to be poor, Fowler noted, “partly because the delay in seeking treatment meant the pony had lost muscle mass in his injured leg. He was ultimately euthanized.
“Based on the evidence summarized, Judge Sidhu concluded the pony was in distress and that Ms. Allen had permitted distress to continue by not undertaking any of the treatment options. Judge Sidhu also concluded that Ms. Allen did not take reasonable steps to either raise funds for treatment or surrender the pony to the SPCA,” Fowler stated.