The Animal Welfare Act 2006
A new law came into affect on 6th April 2007 which has consequences for all animal owners and carers. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 introduces tougher penalties for neglect and cruelty, including fines of up to £20,000, a maximum jail term of 51 weeks and a lifetime ban on some owners keeping pets. Under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, five freedoms have to be given to pets in order to comply with the law: Freedom from hunger and thirst – provide fresh, clean water and the right amount of food to keep the animal fit and healthy. Freedom from discomfort – animals should be protected from extreme weather conditions such as hot or cold temperatures, wind, rain and humidity. A suitable, clean, dry resting area should be available to animals at all times. Freedom from pain, injury and disease – animals should be inspected regularly to make sure they are well. Animals that appear to be ill, diseased or injured must be cared for without delay. If they do not respond to that care, professional advice must be sought without delay. Freedom to behave normally – make sure the animals have enough space and proper facilities to display normal behaviour, including regular interaction with other animals where appropriate. Freedom from fear and distress – make sure the conditions the animal lives and plays in and the treatment the animal receives avoids mental suffering. Ban on docking tails, ear cropping, taking part in a dog fight or training a dog to fight. If you are concerned for the welfare of a dog, you can contact us and we will endeavour to visit the address and assess the situation and act accordingly.
The Dangerous Dog Act
Section 3 of the 1991 Act created a new offence of being an owner of a dog of any type or breed which is dangerously out of control in a public place or a non-public place in which it is not permitted to be. Detailed guidance on the legislation was issued to police forces and the courts between 1991 and 1998 by the Home Office.
Dogs out of control in a public place
If a dog is dangerously out of control in a public place – then the owner or the person in charge of the dog is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person, an aggravated offence under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. In proceedings against a person who is the owner of a dog but at the material time was not in charge of it, it should be a defence for the accused to prove that the dog was at the material time in the charge of a person whom he reasonably believed to be a fit and proper person to be in charge of it.
Section 10(2) of the 1991 Act defines a public place as meaning any street, road or other place to which the public have, or are permitted to have access. This is a wide definition of a public place and one which specifically includes the common parts of a building containing two or more dwellings. It is intended to cover, for instance, those parts of a block of flats where, although there may be a secure front entry door so that the interior of the flat is not a place to which the public has unrestricted access, nevertheless the common parts are, in all other respects, a public place.A person found guilty of an offence may face imprisonment or a fine, and the courts may disqualify the offender from having custody of a dog for any period.
It is an offence to allow a dog to be dangerously out of control in a public place or in a private place where it is not allowed to be. In addition, the ownership of certain types of dog, such as the Pit Bull Terrier, is prohibited. It is also an offence to breed from, sell or exchange (even as a gift) a prohibited type of a dog. People need to be assured there are laws in place that enable the police, local authorities and the courts to respond when owners have failed to prevent their dogs becoming dangerously out of control.
26 October 2012 – Consultation on proposal to increase the fee to add a prohibited type dog to the Index of Exempted Dogs
20 August 2012 – Sentencing Council’s new guidelines on dangerous dogs offences come into force.
23 April 2012 – Consultation on tackling irresponsible dog ownership – Defra sought views on a proposed package of measures aimed at tackling irresponsible ownership of dogs.
Dogs and Trespass
In civil law a dog owner is liable if he or she deliberately sends a dog on to another person’s land in pursuit of game. A civil offence is also committed if a dog owner allows a dog to roam at large in the knowledge that it is likely to kill game. No entry on the land by the owner of the dog is necessary in order for the proceedings to succeed. If a dog of its own accord enters land without permission but does no more, its owner is not liable under civil law for trespass; nor is it a criminal offence unless there is a contravention of regulations made under the Control of Dogs Order. Under civil law it is likely that the dog’s owner would be liable for any damage which it is in the nature of a dog to commit. It is an offence for a dog to be at large, ie not on a lead or otherwise under close control, in a field of sheep. Sheep dogs and police dogs are exempted from this provision.
Dogs Worrying Livestock
The Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act 1953
Under the Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act 1953 the owner and anyone else under whose control the dog is at the time will be guilty of an offence if it worries livestock on agricultural land. The dog must have been attacking or chasing livestock in such a way that it could reasonably be expected to cause injury or suffering or, in the case of females, abortion or the loss or diminution of their produce. An offence is not committed if at the time of the worrying the livestock were trespassing, the dog belonged to the owner of the land on which the trespassing livestock were and the person in charge of the dog did not cause the dog to attack the livestock. The definition of ‘livestock’ includes cattle, sheep, goats, swine, horses and poultry. Game birds are not included.
The Animals Act 1971
Civil liability arises from the Animals Act 1971. Anyone who is the keeper of a dog that causes damage by killing or injuring livestock is liable for the damage caused. For the purposes of the Act the keeper is the owner or the person in possession of the dog. The head of the household is liable where the owner is under the age of 16.
Dogs Control Orders – Other legislation
Under the Town Police Clauses Act of 1847 it is an offence for any person in any street: to let an unmuzzled ferocious dog be at large so that it obstructs or annoys the residents or passengers in the street or puts them in danger; or to set on or to urge any dog to attack, worry or put in fear any person or animal. A dog will not be at large while it is held on a lead. The word ‘street’ here is given an extended meaning to include any road, square, court, alley, thoroughfare or public passage.
Town Police Clauses Act of 1847
In the Metropolitan Police District a similar offence has been created by the Metropolitan Police Act of 1839. This differs only from the first part of the 1847 Act offence in that it is sufficient that an unmuzzled dog be at large (no obstruction, annoyance or danger need be shown), and that the place of the offence is described as any thoroughfare or public place.
Metropolitan Police Act of 1839
Under the Dogs Act 1871, any person may make a complaint to a magistrates court that a dog is dangerous, or report the matter to the police. If the court is satisfied that a dog is dangerous and not kept under proper control, it may make an order for it to be controlled or destroyed.
Animals Act 1971
Dog Control Orders replaced Dog Byelaws in April 2006. Existing byelaws remain in effect until such time as a dog control order for the same issue is made on the same land.
The Animals Act 1971 provides that the keeper of an animal is liable for any damage it causes, if he knows it was likely to cause such damage or injury unrestrained.
Dog Control Orders – Using the legislation
Section 3(5) of the 1991 Act clarifies the application of the Dogs Act 1871. The strength of the 1871 Act is that as it is not part of the criminal law, it operates on a lower standard of proof and proceedings can be taken even when a criminal offence has not been committed. It provides a remedy in a wide range of circumstances for the destruction, or imposition of controls, on dangerous dogs. A particular advantage of the 1871 Act is the fact that it applies everywhere, even in and around a private house which is why it is particularly appropriate for action on behalf of people such as postmen and women who are regularly at risk from dogs in front gardens.
Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 prohibits four types of dog:
THE PIT BULL TERRIER
THE JAPANESE TOSA
THE DOGO ARGENTINO
THE FILA BRASILEIRO
It is important to note that, in the UK, dangerous dogs are classified by “type”, not by breed label. This means that whether a dog is considered dangerous, and therefore prohibited, will depend on a judegment about its physical characteristics, and whether they match the description of a prohibited ‘type’. This assessment of the physical characteristics is made by a court.
The 1991 Act was amended by the Dangerous Dogs (Amendment) Act 1997. The 1997 Act removed the mandatory destruction order provisions of the 1991 Act by giving the courts discretion on sentencing, and re-opened the Index of Exempted Dogs for those prohibited dogs which the courts consider would not pose a risk to the public. Only courts can direct that a dog can be placed on the list of exempted dogs.
Guard Dogs Act 1975
Only section 1 of the Guard Dogs Act 1975 has ever entered into force. This means that all the other sections relating to a licensing scheme are not in force and neither are there any plans to do so. Section 1, which is in force, relates to the control of guard dogs. (1) A person shall not use or permit the use of a guard dog at any premises unless a person (‘the handler’) who is capable of controlling the dog is present on the premises and the dog is under the control of the handler at all times while it is secured so that it is not at liberty to go freely about the premises. (2) The handler of a guard dog shall keep the dog under his control always while it is being used as a guard dog at any premises except: (a) while another handler has control over the dog; or (b) while the dog is secured so that it is not at liberty to go freely about the premises. (3) A person shall not use or permit the use of a guard dog at any premises unless a notice containing a warning that a guard dog is present is clearly exhibited at each entrance to the premises.The owner of a guard dog may be liable for any injury to a person under s 2(2) of the Animals Act 1971, unless they come within one of the exceptions.
KEY FACTS AND FIGURES
There are approximately 8 million dogs in UK. In England in 2010, there were over 6,000 hospital admissions resulting from being bitten or struck by a dog (excludes people treated in minor injury units (MIU) or accident and emergency (A&E) departments, without being admitted as an inpatient).
In 2009, dog attacks on people in England cost the Health Service £3.3 million.
Estimate of 6,000 dog attacks on postmen/women, parcel force and telecoms staff each year.
Police and local authorities have powers to seize dogs they consider to be dangerously out of control.
Police, local authorities and animal welfare groups work together in some areas to promote responsible dog ownership.
Key Publications and Documents
Control of Dogs, The Law and You – Guidance on the law governing the control of dogs.
Dangerous Dogs Law – Guidance for Enforcers – Guidance to aid enforcers in the use of dangerous dogs law. The guidance, written in association with the police, local authorities and the RSPCA, explains the law on dangerous dogs and provides examples of good ractice when enforcing the legislation. Index of Exempted Dogs If you have a prohibited type dog and a court has issued a contingency destruction order in respect of the dog, you will be contacted by the Index of Exempted Dogs. The Index will ask you to complete some requirements in order for your dog to be entered onto the Index and for the destruction order to be lifted. If you need to contact the Index of Exempted Dogs about your case, their contact details are: e-mail: email@example.com
Telephone: 020 7238 1506
Fax: 020 7238 1100
PO Box 68250