The recent decision to prohibit the XL Bully type has once again brought the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 into the spotlight. The announcement followed a number of high-profile incidents and renewed public debate about whether the current legal framework governing dangerous dogs is effective.
For many dog owners, the law can come as a surprise. The Dangerous Dogs Act creates serious criminal offences which can lead not only to conviction and imprisonment, but also to the destruction of a dog.
This article explains how the legislation works and considers whether the current approach remains fit for purpose.
What does the Dangerous Dogs Act do?
The Dangerous Dogs Act was introduced in 1991 following a series of widely reported dog attacks. It created several criminal offences relating to dangerous dogs, the most well-known being the prohibition on certain types of dog.
Section 1 of the Act makes it an offence to own, breed, sell, give away or abandon a prohibited type of dog.
The prohibited types are:
- Pit Bull Terrier
- Japanese Tosa
- Dogo Argentino
- Fila Brasileiro
More recently, the XL Bully has also been added to the list of prohibited types.
Possession of a prohibited dog can result in a criminal conviction and the destruction of the animal unless the court orders that the dog be placed on the Index of Exempted Dogs.
Types rather than breeds
A common misunderstanding is that the legislation bans particular breeds of dog. In fact, the law prohibits “types” of dog rather than recognised breeds.
This distinction is important. A dog does not need to be a pedigree Pit Bull to fall within the legislation. Instead, the court considers whether the dog’s physical characteristics substantially match those associated with a Pit Bull type.
In practice this often involves expert evidence and detailed measurements of the dog’s physical features.
For many owners this can come as a shock. A dog may have no history of aggression and yet still fall within the prohibited category because of its appearance.
The exemption scheme
Since amendments made in 1997, prohibited type dogs do not always have to be destroyed.
Courts have the power to order that a dog be placed on the Index of Exempted Dogs if satisfied that the animal does not pose a danger to public safety and that the owner is a fit and proper person.
Where a dog is exempted, strict conditions apply. These include:
- microchipping and neutering
- registration on the Index of Exempted Dogs
- third-party insurance
- keeping the dog muzzled and on a lead in public
If these conditions are breached, the exemption may be revoked.
Dangerously out of control dogs
The Act also criminalises situations where a dog is “dangerously out of control”.
A dog may be considered dangerously out of control if there are reasonable grounds for a person to fear injury.
The offence applies regardless of breed and can arise in both public and private places.
Where injury is caused, the consequences can be severe. The maximum sentence for causing injury is five years’ imprisonment, and where a person dies as a result of the attack the maximum penalty rises to fourteen years.
Courts also have the power to order that the dog be destroyed.
Has the legislation worked?
More than three decades after its introduction, the effectiveness of breed specific legislation remains controversial.
Many animal welfare organisations argue that banning particular types of dog does little to reduce attacks. Critics say that the focus on physical characteristics overlooks the wider factors that contribute to dangerous behaviour, including training, environment and ownership.
Research into dog attacks has produced mixed results and there is limited reliable data about the breeds involved in many incidents.
What is clear is that serious dog attacks continue to occur despite the existence of breed specific legislation.
The continuing debate
Supporters of reform argue that greater emphasis should be placed on responsible ownership, improved regulation of breeding and better education about dog behaviour.
Others maintain that banning certain powerful types of dog remains a necessary public safety measure.
Whatever the wider policy debate, the legal framework created by the Dangerous Dogs Act continues to have significant consequences for dog owners across England and Wales.
Legal advice in dog law cases
Cases involving the Dangerous Dogs Act can be complex and often involve expert evidence about the dog’s type and behaviour.
For owners, the stakes can be extremely high. In addition to criminal penalties, the court may ultimately decide whether a dog should be destroyed or exempted.
Early legal advice can therefore be critical in protecting both the owner and the animal.
If you would like to discuss any aspect of your case, please contact us through our contact page here. Alternatively you can phone 0333 240 7373, or email us at [email protected]. Reeds Solicitors is an award winning and leading top-tier criminal defence firm.