One cannot help but feel that there is a serious need to consider some form of dangerous dogs legislation for Barbados to supplement the laws that deal with liability for injury caused by animals.
Dangerous dogs legislation has almost in every case been precipitated by vicious attacks by dogs, resulting in death and/or serious injury. One such example is the British Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, which was introduced following various attacks by vicious dogs resulting in death or serious injury and reported widely in the tabloid press.
The long title to the legislation describes it as “an act to prohibit persons from having in their possession or custody dogs belonging to types bred for fighting, to impose restrictions in respect of such dogs pending the coming into force of the prohibition; to enable restrictions to be imposed in relation to other types of dog which present a serious danger to the public; to make further provision for securing that dogs are kept under proper control; and for connected purposes”.
Section 1 of the Act reads as follows:
1(i) This section applies to:–
(a) any dog of the type known as the pit bull terrier;
(b) any dog of the type known as the Japanese tosa; and
(c) any dog of any type designated for the purposes of this section by an order of the Secretary of State, being a type appearing to him to be bred for fighting or have the characteristics of a type bred for fighting or to have the characteristics of a type bred for that purpose.
(2) No person shall –
(a) breed, or breed from a dog to which this section applies;
(b) sell or exchange a dog or offer, advertise or expose for sale or exchange;
(c) make or offer to make a gift of such a dog or advertise or expose such dog as a gift;
(d) allow such a dog of which he is the owner or of which he is for the time being in charge to be in a public place without being muzzled or kept on a lead, or
(e) abandon such a dog of which he is the owner or, being the owner or for the time being in charge of such a dog, allow it to stray.
Any person contravening, inter alia, the above provisions is guilty of an offence and may be fined or imprisoned for a term not exceeding six months.
The act also deals with dogs that are dangerously out of control in a public place and makes the owner or the person in control of the dog guilty of an offence in those circumstances.
Where such a dog injures any person the owner or person in charge is guilty of an aggravated offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.
Where a person is convicted of any of the offences described above, the court may order the destruction of the dog and may order the offender to be disqualified for such period as it thinks fit from having custody of a dog.
The act has been viewed by some as an overreaction to public sentiment at the time; others feel that it does not go far enough.
