Appeal by way of case stated following a ruling as to the meaning of ‘animal fighting’ within s.8 of the 2006 Act in the context of a prosecution by the Appellant (‘the RSPCA’) against various individuals said to be members of a group known as the ‘Devon Destroyers’.
Held: ‘a) The District Judge was correct in deciding (by reference to and on the basis of the assumed facts) that in order for an offence of animal fighting to be committed contrary to section 8 of the Act as defined by section 8(7) thereof, that the other animal, with which a protected animal is placed, has to be the subject of some control or restraint by some person or persons connected with that activity or some other artificial constraint so that its ability to escape is prevented;
b) The District Judge was correct in considering that the tenet of section 8 of the Act is aimed at organised and controlled animal fights, such as dog fights. In so far as he held that money had invariably to be involved for there to be an offence under section 8 of the Act, he was incorrect.’
Bean LJ, Carr DBE J
[2016] EWHC 928 (Admin)
Bailii
Animal Welfare Act 2006 8
Crime
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.563224
