Justice for puppy farm dogs
Justice for puppy farm dogs
Latest: Oct. 8, 2017
Help us appeal!
High Court ruling confirms the need for urgent reform of dog breeding legislation
On Wednesday 26th July 2017, judgment was handed down by Mr Justice Garnham, in a test case brought by us which …
Read moreStop the suffering of puppy farm dogs: round two!
We succeeded in our first judicial review against North Kesteven District Council: the court quashed two dog breeding licences and the council grudgingly agreed that the Animal Welfare Act 2006 does apply in puppy farms. But, they have since issued a new licence to the establishment, so we are now raising funds for round two!
Our case
We believe that before granting a licence to a dog breeding establishment, the licensing authority should, as part of its licencing regime, check carefully whether the establishment meets the basic requirements of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.
The Animal Welfare Act was set up to protect all animals in England and Wales. The basic animal rights include:
- The right to a suitable environment - for a pet/companion dog this cannot be the barns or other outbuildings that are currently being used to house hundreds of dogs;
- The right to exhibit natural behaviour - the natural behaviour for a pet/companion dog is to be a person’s companion and to be able to exercise, interact and play in the manner to which they were designed and bred;
- The right to be protected from pain, suffering and disease – suffering is inflicted on these dogs due to their unsuitable environment and inability to exhibit natural behaviour. In addition, we have concerns about hygiene and disease (genetic and contagious) control.
North Kesteven District Council in Lincolnshire has granted successive dog breeding licences to “Swindells Livestock Ltd” now trading as "Little Rascals Pets Ltd", enabling them to keep 200 breeding bitches, which is not to mention the many stud dogs and puppies that are kept. There can be a staggering number of dogs on site at any one time (between around 330 - 370). In our view, these dogs all live in unsuitable conditions by reference to the Animal Welfare Act.
If successful, our case will not only prevent the suffering of dogs in North Kesteven, but will set a precedent for other local authorities to follow, ensuring that Councils can no longer issue licences to establishments that do not meet the Animal Welfare Act.
Our first judicial review uncovered a variety of technical failings on behalf of the Council; these flaws led to the court ordering two dog breeding licences to be quashed on 18 October 2016. Unfortunately, the Council immediately re-licenced the premises. Therefore, we have started new a judicial review – focussed on the Animal Welfare Act failings.
UPDATE! We have now been given permission to proceed to full Judicial Review. Our hearing will take place on 5th and 6th July 2017 at the Royal Courts of Justice, London.
How much are we raising and what is it for?
Our initial target is £5,000 which will go some way to pay our lawyers for the work which they have already done at the first stage, which includes: sending a pre-action letter, preparing the application for judicial review, considering the response from the Council and preparing a response.
With your help we can continue our fight for the rights of these dogs, and the thousands of others, held in unsuitable conditions throughout the country. Thank you!
Get updates about this case
Subscribe to receive email updates from the case owner on the latest news about the case.
Be a promoter
Your share on Facebook could raise £26 for the case
I'll share on Facebook
Chancepixies Animal Welfare
Oct. 8, 2017
Help us appeal!
High Court ruling confirms the need for urgent reform of dog breeding legislation
On Wednesday 26th July 2017, judgment was handed down by Mr Justice Garnham, in a test case brought by us which aimed to set a legal precedent that would have helped to see an end to the suffering of dogs held in licensed, large scale commercial breeding establishments or ‘puppy farms’.
In bringing the case we hoped to persuade the Judge that the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and the Code of Practice issued under it should apply when a commercial dog breeding establishment applies to its local council for a dog breeding licence. Presently, most councils only consider the requirements of the Breeding of Dogs Act 1973 which prescribes matters such as size of kennels and levels of heating and lighting, but does not deal with more qualitative aspects of dog welfare, such as the need for dogs to have appropriate levels of human contact.
The Judge found that when inspecting commercial breeding establishments local authorities are not required to consider in detail the Code of Practice for the Welfare of Dogs (issued under the Animal Welfare Act 2006). Giving judgment, the Judge said: “…the Code was not designed to be a list of pre-requisites for the grant of a licence under the 1973 Act. … Had that been Parliament’s intention the 2006 Act could have specified that was so”.
The judgment highlights an anomaly in the legal framework which effectively holds puppy farmers to lower standards of animal welfare than those to which every day owners of pet dogs are held.
North Kesteven District Council has over a number of years continued to renew the licence of a particularly large ‘puppy farm’ – allowing it to keep 200 breeding bitches. At the last inspection there were a staggering 368 dogs on site. Of these 142 were puppies and 226 were adult dogs. The proprietors say that they have 14 full time staff members (although they gave a conflicting account of the number of staff and working patterns in a case brought against them by HMRC earlier this year). Even 14 full time staff, in our view, are insufficient to give the 368 dogs the focused affection and companionship that they need. These dogs were, after all, bred over generations by humans, to live with humans, as companions. We are supposedly a nation of dog lovers. If so, how have we allowed this to happen?
Although bitterly disappointed at the result, we remain upbeat, there is a chance of appeal but we need to financially able to do so and we have a deadline of the 16th August to lodge an appeal. In any event, we will renew our efforts on campaigning to obtain support from DEFRA and the Government to address this discrepancy.
Unfortunately, our charity is not a wealthy one; we came into this sector to make a difference not make money, and this action had the ability to make such a huge difference that we felt it was worth the risk, we still believe this to be the case and we can still make a national change, but only if we survive, this case may well cost the charity everything unless it gets the financial support to continue.
Get updates about this case
Subscribe to receive email updates from the case owner on the latest news about the case.
Recent contributions