Judges: Newman J, Stanley Burnton J Citations: [2006] EWHC 1069 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Protection of Animals Act 1911 (1)(a) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Animals, Crime Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.242195
The claimant had requested the magistrates to revisit their decision as to his disqualification from caring for animals Citations: [2007] EWHC 637 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes:
The defendant had had responsibility to investigate and if necessary prosecute a company suspected of serious offences of bribery and corruption in the conduct of contract negotiations. The investigation had been stopped, alledgedly at the instigation of the government of Saudi Arabia, with a threat of ceasing co-operation in security arrangements. Held: The rule of … Continue reading Corner House Research and Campaign Against Arms Trade, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office and Another: Admn 10 Apr 2008
The defendant who had had 75 cats in her home with consequences that they had been not well looked after was convicted of animal cruelty. She had been ‘given a conditional discharge’, one of the conditions being that she could not thereafter look after more than two cats at any one time. Citations: [2005] EWHC … Continue reading Nash v Birmingham Crown Court: Admn 18 Feb 2005
The defendants had been convicted of animal welfare offences, and banned from keeping animals. The claimant sought to enter the premises to remove animals, but were denied entry. Held: The court had no power to make an order to allow access for this purpose:’ truth what the Council is doing is to point to deficiencies … Continue reading Worcestershire County Council v Tongue, Tongue, and Tongue: CA 17 Feb 2004
The defendant had been convicted of cruelty to his animals. The prosecutor appealed dismissal of an application for an interim order for protection under the 2000 Act in respect of other animals not the subject of the application. Held: The 2000 Act preserved the meanings used in the 1911 Act, and the section did not … Continue reading Cornwall County Council v Baker: Admn 18 Feb 2003
Citations: [1997] EWHC Admin 11 Links: Bailii Statutes: Protection of Animals Act 1911 Criminal Practice Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136956
‘causing unnecessary suffering’ under the Act means doing something which it is not reasonably necessary to do and which is not justified. Citations: [1925] 2 KB 794 Statutes: Protection of Animals Act 1911 1 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Applied – Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty To Animals, Regina (on the Application … Continue reading Barnard v Evans: 1925
Law relating to injury of animals worrying stock should be clarified; archaic language and conflicting provisions. Citations: Times 11-Dec-1997 Statutes: Protection of Animals Act 1911, Criminal Damage Act 1971 Animals Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82439
Total relinquishment of an animal is necessary, for there to have been an abandonment of the animal under the Act. Citations: Ind Summary 29-Mar-1993, Times 23-Mar-1993 Statutes: Abandonment of Animals Act 1960, Protection of Animals Act 1911 Animals Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81529
The respondent society had removed cattle from the claimant’s farm after findings against the farmer under the 1911 Act. The parties now disputed liability for the costs incurred. . .
Appeal against conviction of animal cruelty. . .
Defendants had been convicted of maltreatment of horses. The crown court had overturned a permanent ban on keeping horses, substituting a limit of keeping 25 horses with a conditional discharge. The prosecutor now appealed.
Held: The court had . .
The defendant was licensed to set Larson traps to catch magpies. The traps worked by keeping a magpie as a decoy to attract others. The evidence was that the trapped magpie suffered distress and injury because the trap was so small as not to allow . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
The claimant said that the keeping of various animals by the defendant on their land was in breach of a restrictive covenant and of a compromise agreement which also used the phrase ‘undomesticated animals’. The judge had held that this did not include animals normally kept as pets or were akin to pets. Held: The … Continue reading Broughton v Bower and Another: CA 25 May 2006
