13/03 Legislation 5:
Legal Opinion no.1: “I am assuming that the facts have occurred after the
act” –FB was not public until after 2006. In the absence of a date I am
assuming we have jurisdiction.
Legal system course documents: 3 different programmes- Panic Stations
may be useful. Look at it later- makes marking transparent by giving 3
examples of papers- some ideas of skills we‟re building towards.
Often there is a pivotal word which will change the outcome when it
actually enters court.
The Facts: Claus Miowalot breads and boards cats which are
enclosed in cat runs.
One day he hears a commotion and goes outside to see a hole in
the run, and his champion breeder is injured. He sees a dog
trotting off with something in its‟ mouth.
Claus retrieves his firearm and shoots the dog.
Owner of the pedigree dog has a grievance against Claus. He
wants to be compensated for its‟ loss. Civil situation.
Claus believes he has legal protection for shooting the dog, under
56(1) Dog Control and Hydatids Act, 1982.
The Task: acting for the defendant.
Plaintive is Lionel, suing the defendant (Claus) because he alleges
Analyse Statutory Provisions:
56. Dogs attacking persons or stock rushing at vehicles-
1. 1)Any person who sees a dog attacking any person,
stock, or poultry, or who is himself attacked by any
such dog, may forthwith either seize or destroy the
2. 2) deals with the rights of a policeman on how they
may treat the dog, provided that there is someone
who saw the act, and may identify the dog as
3. 3) tells the person who seized the dog (under
subsection 1) to return it to its owner or take it to a
dog control officer.
4. 4) tells the court what it can do- beyond reasonable
doubt, find owner and order that the dog be
destroyed if it has not already been done.
Sees(verb): visually observed.
The date of the incident Clause is a person
Jaws is a dog
Clause was at the time of the incident, inside reading.
(Before that you can elect to destroy a dog under 56(1) of
the Dog Control and Hydatids Act 1982, you must see the
Attack was on the cat- establish that the cat is “stock”.
Stock: (b) other animal that is kept within a fence of
enclosure for domestic or farming purposes. Relevant
whether the cat was in a cat run, and for what purpose that
Issues: contentious or non-contentious elements that need to be
satisfied. Turning legally relevant fact into a question.
Is the act in force on the date of the incident? Non
Does it apply to the destruction of Jaws? –“relating to the
control of dogs”- found in the long title. Non contentious.
Is Claus „any person‟? Non contentious.
Did Claus „see a dog attacking‟? Contentious: Claus was
inside reading- hears a disturbance- when he gets there, the
dog is already some distance away. If the act requires
somebody to visually observe the engagement to lawfully
destroy, Claus may not be able to argue that he can use
section 56 clause 1 as a shield to liability.
Is the cat „stock‟ within the definition in section 2
paragraph (b)? Contentious.
ALWAYS THINK ABOUT BOTH SIDES OF THE