JSF13
24th March 2007, 16:47
This ruling will help thousands of dogs and their owners.
TORONTO, March 23 /CNW/ - Despite headlines proclaiming that Ontario's
pitbull ban has been upheld by the Superior Court, the Toronto Humane Society
is thrilled that two key aspects of the law have been struck down. Firstly the
vague definition of "pitbull and pitbull-like" has been found faulty. The ban,
while it stands, now applies only to purebred pitbulls. This removes death
sentences from literally thousands of dogs who have had the misfortune of
being pitbull-like. Secondly, bylaw enforcement officers are no longer allowed
to go to court armed only with a veterinarian's certificate stating that the
dog in question is a pitbull. This is significant because you can't
cross-examine a piece of paper. The combination of the clarified definition
and the added civic responsibility of demanding witnesses actually attend
court will make it far more difficult to prosecute questionable and spurious
cases. In fact, it looks like the law has actually applied the traditional
standard of fairness, which is to say most of the mixed-breed dogs that have
been unfairly caught in the net of the original legislation are now innocent
until proven guilty.
If you'd like any more information or want to come down to the THS,
please contact senior communicator Lee Oliver.
Also
Ont. pitbull ban upheld by court
CanWest News Service
Published: Friday, March 23, 2007
TORONTO — The Ontario Superior court has upheld Ontario’s controversial pit bull ban legislation.
“We consider this to be a good day for public safety in Ontario,” Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant told reporters Friday.
“This is the first legislation of its kind, I would anticipate that it would now be copied in a number of jurisdictions across North America.”
Email to a friendEmail to a friendPrinter friendlyPrinter friendly
Font:
* *
* *
* *
* *
The Dog Owner’s Liability Act bans Ontarians from acquiring pitbulls and says owners must neuter existing animals and ensure they’re leashed and muzzled in public.
Violators face a maximum penalty of $10,000 and six months in jail.
Ontario’s Liberal government introduced the ban following a series of horrific attacks that left people badly maimed.
The court did find fault with two provisions of the legislation.
In the first instance, it didn’t accept that pitbull terriers (as opposed to purebred pitbulls) be subject to the ban.
In the second, it said it wasn’t acceptable for bylaw enforcement officers going after violators to go to court armed only with a veterinarian’s signed document stating the animal involved is a pit bull. In the future, such expert testimony will have to be presented in person.
Caroline Wawzonek, a lawyer representing Toronto pitbull owner Catherine Cochrane, said the court decision will be appealed.
Cochrane’s constitutional challenge of the act was backed by the Dog Legislation Council of Canada, which represents a number of dog breeding and animal interest groups.
Prominent Toronto lawyer Clayton Ruby, who led Cochrane’s legal team, argued in his presentation to the court last spring that the definition of pitbull in the provincial law is too vague.
TORONTO, March 23 /CNW/ - Despite headlines proclaiming that Ontario's
pitbull ban has been upheld by the Superior Court, the Toronto Humane Society
is thrilled that two key aspects of the law have been struck down. Firstly the
vague definition of "pitbull and pitbull-like" has been found faulty. The ban,
while it stands, now applies only to purebred pitbulls. This removes death
sentences from literally thousands of dogs who have had the misfortune of
being pitbull-like. Secondly, bylaw enforcement officers are no longer allowed
to go to court armed only with a veterinarian's certificate stating that the
dog in question is a pitbull. This is significant because you can't
cross-examine a piece of paper. The combination of the clarified definition
and the added civic responsibility of demanding witnesses actually attend
court will make it far more difficult to prosecute questionable and spurious
cases. In fact, it looks like the law has actually applied the traditional
standard of fairness, which is to say most of the mixed-breed dogs that have
been unfairly caught in the net of the original legislation are now innocent
until proven guilty.
If you'd like any more information or want to come down to the THS,
please contact senior communicator Lee Oliver.
Also
Ont. pitbull ban upheld by court
CanWest News Service
Published: Friday, March 23, 2007
TORONTO — The Ontario Superior court has upheld Ontario’s controversial pit bull ban legislation.
“We consider this to be a good day for public safety in Ontario,” Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant told reporters Friday.
“This is the first legislation of its kind, I would anticipate that it would now be copied in a number of jurisdictions across North America.”
Email to a friendEmail to a friendPrinter friendlyPrinter friendly
Font:
* *
* *
* *
* *
The Dog Owner’s Liability Act bans Ontarians from acquiring pitbulls and says owners must neuter existing animals and ensure they’re leashed and muzzled in public.
Violators face a maximum penalty of $10,000 and six months in jail.
Ontario’s Liberal government introduced the ban following a series of horrific attacks that left people badly maimed.
The court did find fault with two provisions of the legislation.
In the first instance, it didn’t accept that pitbull terriers (as opposed to purebred pitbulls) be subject to the ban.
In the second, it said it wasn’t acceptable for bylaw enforcement officers going after violators to go to court armed only with a veterinarian’s signed document stating the animal involved is a pit bull. In the future, such expert testimony will have to be presented in person.
Caroline Wawzonek, a lawyer representing Toronto pitbull owner Catherine Cochrane, said the court decision will be appealed.
Cochrane’s constitutional challenge of the act was backed by the Dog Legislation Council of Canada, which represents a number of dog breeding and animal interest groups.
Prominent Toronto lawyer Clayton Ruby, who led Cochrane’s legal team, argued in his presentation to the court last spring that the definition of pitbull in the provincial law is too vague.