A 116 te contraria aun de lo que ellos mismos dispusieron.Esto motiva a que, si bien se nota una tendencia a reconocer a los animales como sujetos de determinados derechos, en la sentencia dictada por el Tribunal Supremo de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, en 2018, por mayoría se le negó el derecho a la libertad. En conclusión, todavía es apresurado emitir un juicio definitivo sobre la temática, aunque se puede resaltar el inicio de un camino hacia la categorización de los animales como seres sintientes y sujetos de sus propios derechos.Palabras clave: animales, sujetos de derechos, seres sintientes, jurisprudencia, Argentina.
The legal subjectivity of animals according to Argentine jurisprudence
AbstractThe purpose of this jurisprudential review article is the comparative analysis of all judgments resolved in Argentina, until 2018, regarding the legal categorization of animals. In compliance with this objective, the methodology used consisted of identifying the philosophical, ethical and legal conceptions supported in each one of them to make a comparative analysis of the same. As limitations were identified, on the one hand, because of the novelty of the subject, that there are few cases to be analyzed and on the other, that in Argentina courts generally tend to continue with the argumentative line of their superiors, but since jurisprudence is not mandatory, the magistrates can resolve in totally contrary way even of what they themselves arranged. This motivates that, although there is a tendency to recognize animals as subjects of certain rights, in the ruling issued by the Supreme Court of Buenos Aires City, in 2018, by majority was denied the right to freedom. In conclusion, it is still urgent to issue a final judgment on the subject, although LA SUBJETIVIDAD JURÍDICA DE LOS ANIMALES SEGÚN LA JURISPRUDENCIA ARGENTINA