DOGS AND THE LAW - LEGISLATION AND CIVIL LAW This article is intended to outline the legislation and civil law affecting you as a dog owner, but it does not touch on Animal Welfare, which will be the subject of a separate article. As a dog owner you are subject to a great deal of law that has been enacted over the last 150 years or so. Some of the law carries a criminal penalty - others only a civil liability. The purpose of this article is to take you on a guided tour of what, in my view, are the salient points. 1. Ownership and Control These terms run through all dog law and emphasise that whilst the owner of the dog is responsible for its misdemeanours, a person who does not own the dog but has control of it at the time of the relevant incident, may also be held liable in addition to, or even instead of, the owner. I will highlight where in the law these distinctions are made. 2. History An understandable desire to remove danger from dogs to the public at large was demonstrated by the provisons of the Metropolitan Police Act of 1839, which made it a criminal offence for an owner to have an unmuzzled dog at large in any thoroughfare or public place. The application of these provisons was extended to the whole country by the Town Police Clauses Act of 1847, only in this case there has to be an "obstruction, annoyance or danger" for an offence to be committed. The Dogs Act of 1871 provides that any person can complain to a Magistrates Court or to the Police if he or she believes a dog to be dangerous and not kept under proper control. If the Court feels the case proven it has complete discretion to order control or restraint of the dog on such detailed terms as it sees fit - or even to order the dog's destruction. This particular piece of legislation is still in use today as it enables the Court to exercise a wide discretion as to how the dog in question can be dealt with, i.e. a control order. It differs from the latest piece of legislation (Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 as amended - see below) in the following ways:- (a) Proceedings can only be brought against the owner. (b) A single incident is generally not deemed to prove that a dog is dangerous, unless it is exceptional. (c) The Police have no power to seize the dog pending the court hearing. (d) A dog's general behaviour can deem it dangerous, rather than its specific behaviour to a person. (e) The behaviour can be anywhere - it does not have to be in a public place. (f) The Court can't impose a fine or compensation, nor is there a presumption in favour of destruction of the dog. (g) The owner will usually be ordered to pay costs. 3. The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 This is the most recent piece of legislation affecting liability for the ownership or control of dogs which behave dangerously. It was initiated as a result of concern over the popularity of "attack" type dogs, the type being most mentioned by the media, being the "Pit Bull Terrier". It is important to remember, however, that certain provisions of the act apply to all dogs. I do not intend to comment on the four types of dogs that were the subject of the original act - suffice it to say that it is a criminal offence to own one, and the burden of proof is on the owner to show that his dog is not such a "type". This is hardly a satisfactory situation, and the act has been much criticised for this reason. An amending act in 1997 widened the court's powers beyond mandatory destruction and gave it power to alter the list of Excepted Dogs. Criticism continues, but there have, as yet, been no further legislative provisions. Assuming you do not own a dog on "the list" than you can still be prosecuted under the act, if your dog is dangerously out of control in a public place. If the dog actually injures someone, this is an aggravated offence. Penalties may include a fine or imprisonment, and the court may disqualify the owner from having custody of a dog for any period. The definition of "public place" is wide and includes, for example, common stairways and corridors in a block of flats which are otherwise excluded to the general public. It is safer to assume that anywhere outside your own dwelling (be it a house, flat or bedsit) is a public place for this purpose. Dogs dangerously out of control are defined by the act, as actually injuring someone or "there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it may do so". Dogs the subject of proceedings under the 1991 Act may, at their discretion, be seized by the Police, pending the court hearing and there are no bail provisions for dogs so seized. Two pieces of "good" news. Firstly, if the owner can show that, at the time of the offence, the dog was in the custody of someone else whom he reasonably believed to be a fit and proper person to be in charge of it, then he has a defence to the charge. Secondly, section 3 (5)b of the act specifically enables the court to make a control order under the 1871 act referred to above, so as to specifically deal with such cases as nuisance complaints by neighbours, or other situations where a destruction order would be felt too harsh. Such an order may extend to the use of muzzles or even neutering the dog
The Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act 1953. Livestock is defined as "cattle, sheep, goats, swine, horses and poultry". Game birds are not included. If your dog worries livestock in such away that it could reasonably be expected to cause injury or damage (e.g abortion or loss or diminution of produce) than you have committed an offence along with whosoever was in control of the dog at the time - try not to lend your dog to people who may not control it! There are provisions which prevent liability in certain circumstances when livestock has strayed. Animal Act 1971 This act renders the keeper of a dog liable for (in civil law) any damage it causes by killing or injuring livestock. 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 of the dog is under 16 years old. Be careful where the children take the dog! Livestock under this act includes game birds. Again there are saving provisions where the livestock in question has strayed onto your land. Perhaps most interestingly of all, this act provides a defence to someone who is a subject of civil proceedings for killing or injuring a dog that was worrying or about to worry livestock. The defence is only available where there was no other means of ending or preventing the worrying or where the dog that had done the worrying was still in the vicinity and not under control, and there were no practicable means of establishing ownership. 5. Nuisance Noise created by dogs can amount to a nuisance under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Depending on the facts of the case this may result in the local council serving a Noise Abatement Notice or even prosecuting under the said act. 6. Civil Proceedings for Damages If your dog causes damage, arising from your negligence (for example it causes a road accident because you have negligently left the garden gate open) then you could very well be held liable for all the consequences of such an event. When one thinks of the sort of compensation awards in personal injury claims that are commonly made these days, this liability could obviously be substantial. It stands to reason that one should try to avoid being negligent, however, it also makes sense to ensure that you have third party liability insurance that covers such a possibility. 7. Conclusion At first sight the laws affecting you as a dog owner, can be seen as pretty intimidating, but if you apply commonsense and exercise basic control over your dog by training him appropriately, keeping him on a lead in public places etc., not negligently allowing him to roam at will, and being very careful of whom you allow to have control of the animal at any time then like the vast majority of dog owners these provisions will not affect you.
Incidentally, following my last article two or three people raised questions which showed a confusion between legal ownership of a dog and registration of a dog with the Kennel Club. The Kennel Club is precisely that, i.e. a club. It has rules as to the registration of pedigree dogs, which include the registration of the owner of such a dog. The registration of such ownership can only be in accordance with the rules of the club. This does not mean that if you believe you have irrefutable evidence as to the legal ownership of the dog you can oblige the club to register such ownership. It is for this reason that, as mentioned in my last article, when you buy a pedigree dog, registered with the Kennel Club, you obtain all the signed documentation to transfer the registration at the time of purchase. Disclaimer This article is for information and discussion purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice and if you have any points or concerns on the information contained herein you should consult your own solicitor or other appropriate professional advisor
|