Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, for what reasons the Dangerous Dogs Exemptions Schemes (England and Wales) Order 2015 does not give full effect to the court's ruling in R (Sandhin) v Isleworth Crown Court; and if she will make a statement.

Dangerous dogs law is concerned with protecting the safety of the public. The Dangerous Dogs Exemption Schemes (England and Wales) Order 2015 reflects the amendments made by section 107 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. The intention is to remedy the situation created by the High Court decision in R (Sandhu) v Isleworth Crown Court [2012]. The 2015 Order returns the position on ownership of four types of prohibited dogs broadly to where it was before that judgment. The four types of dog are prohibited because they are of a type bred for fighting. The 2015 Order requires a court, when considering whether to exempt a prohibited dog, to take into account whether the intended keeper is a “fit and proper person” and other matters such as suitability of accommodation.

The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 states that no person shall give away, sell, or exchange a prohibited dog. The Sandhu judgment was seen as allowing keepership of exempted prohibited dogs to be transferred to anyone else by the owner with no supervision by the courts or by the Index of Exempted Dogs (which maintains a register of exempted prohibited dogs and liaises with the police.) The 2015 Order prevents exempted prohibited dogs from being transferred in such a way but allows change of keepership where the existing owner has died or has become seriously ill.