swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Animals - From: 1993 To: 1993
This page lists 8 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Normand v Lucas 1993 GWD 15-975
1993
Scotland, Animals, Crime
A lady had fallen in the street and was sitting on a wall when the appellant appeared, along with a small Jack Russell dog. The lady who had fallen encouraged the dog to sit on her knee whilst she was on the wall. She leaned forward and the dog unexpectedly bit her face. Her husband left the scene to summon help from a relative, along with an ambulance. Other individuals appeared on the scene and at the stage when the injured lady was being put into the ambulance the dog bit someone else. Held: The Court noted that while there may not have been evidence from which the sheriff could have inferred that the dog was dangerously out of control when it bit the first lady by the stage of the subsequent bite "there was material upon which the sheriff could have inferred that there were grounds for reasonable apprehension that the dog would injure someone".
1 Citers
Hunt v Duckering Ind Summary, 29 March 1993; Times, 23 March 1993
23 Mar 1993
QBD
Animals
Total relinquishment of an animal is necessary, for there to have been an abandonment of the animal under the Act.
Abandonment of Animals Act 1960 - Protection of Animals Act 1911
Bates v Director of Public Prosecutions Ind Summary, 29 March 1993
29 Mar 1993
QBD
Animals
A car may be a public place for a dog for the purposes of the Act.
Dangerous Dogs Act 1991
Regina v Chief Superintendent of Metropolitan Police Ex Parte Wheeler Ind Summary, 03 May 1993
3 May 1993
QBD
Animals
Exempt Dogs Index entry didn't lapse for failure to tattoo a dog before 22 November 1992.
Dangerous Dogs Act 1991
Regina v Knightsbridge Crown Court ex parte Dunne; Brock v Director of Public Prosecutions; QBD 7-Jul-1993 - Independent, 07 July 1993; Times, 23 July 1993
Commission v Spain (Judgment) C-355/90; [1993] ECR I-4221; [1993] EUECJ C-355/90
2 Aug 1993
ECJ
European, Environment, Animals
Europa Articles 3 and 4 of Directive 79/409 on the conservation of wild birds require Member States to preserve, maintain and re-establish the habitats of the said birds as such, because of their ecological value. The obligations on Member States under those articles exist even before any reduction is observed in the number of birds or any risk of a protected species becoming extinct has materialized.
In implementing Directive 79/409 on the conservation of wild birds, Member States are not authorized to invoke, at their option, grounds of derogation based on taking other interests into account. With respect, more specifically, to the obligation to take special conservation measures for certain species under Article 4 of the directive, such grounds must, in order to be acceptable, correspond to a general interest which is superior to the general interest represented by the ecological objective of the directive. In particular, the interests referred to in Article 2 of the directive, namely economic and recreational requirements, do not enter into consideration, as that provision does not constitute an autonomous derogation from the general system of protection established by the directive.
In choosing the territories which are most suitable for classification as special protection areas pursuant to Article 4(1) of Directive 79/409 on the conservation of wild birds, Member States have a certain discretion which is limited by the fact that the classification of those areas is subject to certain ornithological criteria determined by the directive, such as the presence of birds listed in Annex I to the directive, on the one hand, and the designation of a habitat as a wetland area, on the other. However, Member States do not have the same discretion under Article 4(4) of the directive to modify or reduce the extent of such areas.
Where there has been a failure to classify a suitable area, in breach of Article 4, the requirements of Article 4(4) must still be complied with.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Director of Public Prosecutions v Williams; QBD 25-Oct-1993 - Ind Summary, 25 October 1993
Regina v Bezzina, Regina v Codling, Regina v Elvin; CACD 7-Dec-1993 - Gazette, 02 February 1994; Times, 07 December 1993; [1994] 1 WLR 1057
