Skip to main content

Dangerous Dogs: Prosecutions

Volume 507: debated on Tuesday 16 March 2010

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many (a) prosecutions and (b) convictions there have been in Lancashire for offences in connection with allowing a dog to attack a person in the last 36 months. (321884)

Information showing the number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts in the Lancashire police force area for selected offences under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, from 2006 to 2008 (latest available) can be viewed in the table.

Data for 2009 are planned for publication in autumn 2010.

Number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts in the Lancashire police force area for selected offences under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, from 2006 to 20081,2

Proceeded against

Found guilty

Offence description

Section of the Act

2006

2007

2008

2006

2007

2008

Owner or person in charge allowing dog to be dangerously out of control in a public place injuring any person

S.3 (1)

26

19

19

17

12

15

Owner or person in charge allowing dog to be dangerously out of control in a public place, no injury being caused

S.3 (1)

11

18

12

8

12

5

Owner or person in charge allowing dog to enter a non-public place and injure any person

S.3 (3)

1

1

1

Owner or person in charge allowing dog to enter a non- public place causing reasonable apprehension of injury to a person

S.3 (3)

2

1

1

1

1 The number proceeded against and number found guilty relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences the principal offence is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.

2 Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by police forces and the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.

Source:

Justice Statistics Analytical Services—Ministry of Justice