The High Court has granted an injunction restraining dog wardens from seizing or euthanising XL bully dogs in the care of animal shelters.
Mr Justice John Jordan’s granted the measure, sought by six animal welfare organisations, on Friday, just a day before wardens were due to acquire such powers in relation to the breed.
The judge refused another request for an order halting a ban preventing the dog shelters from rehoming the dogs. That ban will come into force on Saturday as planned.
Mr Justice Jordan’s “stay” on the euthanasia powers is due to last until February 27th, when a substantive court hearing will take on the broader aspects of the Control of Dogs 2024 regulations relating to the XL bully breed.
Civil Service remote working: how often do you work in the office? Have you been asked to come in more frequently?
From KPMG to Bank of Ireland, where do major employers currently stand on working from home?
Order for man to pay lifelong €10,000 monthly maintenance to ex-wife overturned
Civil servants to keep existing remote working arrangements pending talks process with unions
The judge said he was making the ruling while being conscious of public safety and in the context of dog attacks that have left people with irreparable and even fatal injuries.
The case has been brought by My Lovely Horse Rescue, Clare Animal Welfare, Working Animal Guardians, Dogs Angels Ireland, Wicklow Animal Welfare and the Haven Rescue. It is against the Minister for Rural and Community Development, Ireland and the Attorney General.
In October, it became illegal to import, breed, rehome or resell XL bullies, which are the largest of the American bully breed. However, animal shelters and charities with XL bully dogs already in their facilities were given until February 1st to re-home or export them.
A ban on owning the breed without an exemption certificate also comes into force at the weekend. Local authorities can grant certificates for the dogs only if they are licensed, microchipped and neutered.
An owner found to be in breach of the regulations by keeping an XL bully after February 1st without an exemption certificate will have committed a criminal offence under the 1986 Control of Dogs Act. The animal may be seized and euthanised and the owner subject to imprisonment of up to three months or a fine of up to €2,500, or both.
On Friday, the animal organisations' senior counsel, Sunniva McDonagh, told Mr Justice Jordan her clients are “extremely concerned” about public safety and “any suggestion otherwise ... is misguided”.
She said “we are all horrified by dog attacks” but urged the court to use its “clear authority” to grant the interlocutory injunction.
Ms McDonagh, with barrister Mariana Verdes instructed by KOD Lyons solicitors, said her clients feared “irreparable harm may be suffered” in the interim period if the stay on the new regulations was not granted.
Counsel said there was concern about there being no review procedure in the regulations and that dogs misidentified as XL bullies could be put down.
The animal organisations claim the regulation’s definition of an XL bully is “artificial” and vague.
Remy Farrell SC, for the State respondents, said there have been “significant” dog attacks recently, but he acknowledged the possibility of error in identifying an XL bully dog.
Mr Farrell said the jurisprudence of the court regarding putting a stay on statutory provisions was usually “very sparingly exercised”.
Mr Justice Jordan said there was “something illogical” about the legislation not providing any “review mechanism” on a warden’s assessment of the breed of the dog in advance of it being euthanised.
He said he did not see “any real prejudice allowing animals to stay alive until the case is fully determined”, adding that in the interim the dogs would be cared for by “responsible people” who are volunteers.
“You cannot bring back a dead dog to life,” said the judge.
“A patently wrong decision could result in the death of a dog who should not be euthanised, when a challenge or review would have avoided that.”
The judge granted the interlocutory injunction but stressed there were “well-motivated and well-intentioned people on both sides of the argument”.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Join The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Listen to our Inside Politics podcast for the best political chat and analysis
