25 Apr 2024
A judge has given the green light for campaigners to challenge the Government’s decision to outlaw the controversial dog type.
Vet Times
Job Title
Image © Jack / Adobe Stock
Campaigners against the ban on XL bully dogs in England and Wales have won the latest stage of their court battle on the issue.
A judge has granted permission for a legal challenge against the legislation to proceed to trial after ruling that it made an “arguable” case in certain areas.
A further hearing will now take place at a later date and Defra officials have stressed owners must still comply with the conditions of the ban.
But the Don’t Ban Me, Licence Me group, which brought the action, said it was “elated” at the latest ruling, which followed a hearing in London yesterday (24 April).
Since February, it has been illegal to own a non-exempted XL bully in England and Wales. Similar measures are currently being introduced in Scotland, while plans for restrictions in Northern Ireland were announced last month.
Defra insists that XL bullies have been “disproportionately involved” in an increasing trend of dog attacks over recent years, including cases that have led to fatalities.
Although it would not comment directly on the current proceedings, a spokesperson said the department “firmly” believed its action was needed to protect the public.
He added: “We have delivered our pledge to bring in this important measure to protect public safety, and we expect all XL bully owners to comply with the strict conditions.”
But the court was told the Government had failed to carry out “proper research” on the types of dogs involved in attacks.
In written arguments, Cathryn McGahey KC, for the campaigners, said the department had “no material on which to base a rational decision that dogs involved in recent attacks were disproportionately of XL bully type”, PA Media reported.
She also argued that requirements for dogs to be muzzled and kept on a lead in public would not stop attacks as most occur on private property.
She also criticised what she described as the “unlawful vagueness” of the Government’s breed standard, which she argued meant owners could not be sure whether their dog was of the banned type.
