cariad
Well-Known Member
With regard to the favourite topic of Mr J Gray, can anyone explain the following to me? I admit I haven't seen any of the newspaper reports on the case and as far as I can see, the hearings haven't (yet) been reported on Lawtel, if indeed they are going to be, so I haven't seen the actual wording of the judgments so far and if I had I may be enlightened.
As far as I am aware, the Animal Welfare Act 2006 does not make any distinction between "pet" animals and any other sort of animals, i.e. working animals, farm animals, animals bought for selling on, etc. The newly introduced positive duty of care applies to "protected" animals as defined in the Act, which is set out in s2 "animals of a kind commonly domesticated in the British Islands, under the control of man whether on a permanent or temporary basis or not living in a wild state". Whether they are pets or animals waiting to be sold on doesn't seem to come into it. I do appreciate the difference in newspaper reports, which don't always get it technically correct and proper legal reporting, but this seems to have been widely reported.
Any ideas?
As far as I am aware, the Animal Welfare Act 2006 does not make any distinction between "pet" animals and any other sort of animals, i.e. working animals, farm animals, animals bought for selling on, etc. The newly introduced positive duty of care applies to "protected" animals as defined in the Act, which is set out in s2 "animals of a kind commonly domesticated in the British Islands, under the control of man whether on a permanent or temporary basis or not living in a wild state". Whether they are pets or animals waiting to be sold on doesn't seem to come into it. I do appreciate the difference in newspaper reports, which don't always get it technically correct and proper legal reporting, but this seems to have been widely reported.
Any ideas?