Proceeding contribution from Andrew Dismore (Labour) in the House of Commons on Friday, 14 March 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Animals Act 1971 (Amendment) Bill.
Animals Act 1971 (Amendment) Bill
My hon. Friend raises a very interesting point. Ultimately, that is a matter for case law. There is a difference in law between animals that are considered to be wild and those that are considered to be tame. The general definition in the Animals Act sits rather uneasily with the schedule to the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 that specifically sets out dangerous animals. The Animals Act might have been more helpful if it had included such a schedule because that would have made life a lot easier. In the end, characteristics become a question of law. There was a case in which there was a question of whether a filly's prancing around a field and injuring someone was a characteristic. That was not decided under the Animals Act, but if it had been, it would have created interesting law.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 473 c570
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Animals Damage Liability Horse riding Insurance Horses Rural areas Urban areas
- Legislation
- Animals Act 1971 (Amendment) Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 00:58:13 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455499
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455499
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455499