Control of Dogs in UK Law
R v Flack (Michael James)
(3) The court should ordinarily consider, before ordering immediate destruction, whether to exercise the power under section 4a(4) of the 1991 Act to order that, unless the owner of the dog keeps it under proper control, the dog shall be destroyed (“a suspended order of destruction”).
(4) A suspended order of destruction under that provision may specify the measures to be taken by the owner for keeping the dog under control whether by muzzling, keeping it on a lead, or excluding it from a specified place or otherwise: see section 4(a)(5) of the 1991 Act.
(5) A court should not order destruction if satisfied that the imposition of such a condition would mean the dog would not constitute a danger to public safety.
(6) In deciding what order to make, the court must consider all the relevant circumstances which include the dog's history of aggressive behaviour and the owner's history of controlling the dog concerned in order to determine what order should be made.
Draper v Hodder
A person keeping an animal "mansutae naturae" which he knows has a propensity to do a particular kind of mischief is under an absolute duty to prevent it form doing that kind of mischief and is therefore liable without proof of negligence for any damage caused by the animal's acting in accordance with that know propensity.
R v Mose Baballa
As we have observed, was concerned with section 3(1) of the 1991 Act. Nevertheless, we consider that the same principles are applicable to a case which falls within section 1(3) of the 1991 Act.
Legislation governing the regulation of dangerous dogs is notoriously fraught with difficulties, in particular concerning the definitions incorporated within, and the enforcement and application of......... of the le gislative fram ework; the regulation of ‘typ e-specific’ bre eds of dogs, and the extens ion of regulations re lating to the control of dogs fro m public to priva te spheres. Thes e aspects afford an opportunity f or two principal justi fications in favour of co ntrolling owners ......
Criminal Law Additions and Alterations
...... the rst January, 1957; they include provisions relating to the control of dogs on designated roads; the provision of parking places; and ......
Courts of Summary Jurisdiction
......THE DOGS ACT, 1871 The legislation concerning the control of dogs continues to ......
State Taxation: Unrequited Revenue and the Shadow of Section 90
...... benefits to the community at large, (in terms of the control of dogs) and thus to licence holders as members of that ......
Parliamentary Bulletin 11.05.10
...... Alcohol Etc. (Scotland) Bill Children's Hearing (Scotland) Bill Control of Dogs (Scotland) Bill Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Bill ......
Refresh Of The Countryside Code
...... Responding to these concerns, NFU Scotland launched its campaign, Control Your Dog on Farmland, in Glasgow at the beginning of February with four ... Control your pet: always keep dogs on a lead around livestock. Picking up after your dog is not enough: put ......
Revenge Of The Dogs A Tail Of Undue Influence?
...... to have been a simple misunderstanding as to whether Mrs Brindley was to stay with Gordon for a few days or longer quickly span out of control. At one stage, the police were called, as was the local authority adult safeguarding team. Gordon even started County Court proceedings to force ......
Manifesto For Planning 2015: Please Dont Reinvent The Wheel
......Labour had proposed rent control, infrastructure investment, public sector housebuilding and delivery of ...None of the manifestos tackle the issue that dogs what is meant to be a plan-led system - there are no local political ......