Animal Cruelty Sentencing Guidelines 

Over the years, the laws on animal welfare have constantly been evolving. There are various pieces of legislation in place for the protection of specific animals and animal welfare, however, the Animal Welfare Act 2006 primarily protects the welfare of all animals.

The Animal Welfare Act 2006

The Animal Welfare Act 2006 Act provides a legal framework to ensure that animals avoid unnecessary pain and suffering, ill-treatment, and risk of harm. It requires that all owners and keepers of animals have a duty of care to animals and must meet their needs. This would include providing the animal with a suitable environment to live in, adequate food, protection from pain, injury, and suffering.

The Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021

The Animal Welfare (sentencing) Act 2021 makes the provisions about the maximum penalty for certain offences under the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

It provides:

on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, or to a fine, or to both.
on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years, or to a fine, or to both.”
The maximum sentences for animal cruelty have increased from six months to five years over time, allowing the courts to take a tougher approach and impose lengthier sentences than once were for the more serious cases of animal abuse such as dog fighting and the docking of ears and tails. As well as facing a possible prison sentence, anyone who does not comply with the law may be faced with being banned from owning or keeping animals and/or unlimited fines.

The new animal cruelty sentencing guidelines

Most recently new guidelines have been published by the Sentencing Council to reflect the changes to the sentencing introduced by the Animal Welfare (sentencing) Act 2021, which seeks to guide the courts when sentencing in England and Wales. The guidelines deal with s.4 (unnecessary suffering), s.5 (mutilation), s.6 (docking of dogs’ tails), s.7 (administration of poisons), s.8 (fighting).

A further set of guidelines of ‘failing to ensure animal welfare’ has also been published and deals with s.9 (breach of duty of person responsible for animal to ensure welfare). This guideline will continue to apply to magistrates’ courts because the maximum penalty for this offence has not changed and remains within magistrates’ sentencing powers.

However, both sets of guidelines came into force on 1 July 2023 and will apply to adults only.

Her Honour Judge Rosa Dean (sentencing council member), commented:

“Animal cruelty is a serious offence, and animals can experience untold suffering at the hands of people who they trust to look after them, including being left in appalling conditions or forced to fight each other for money. The new guidelines will guarantee that courts have the powers to deliver appropriate sentences to offenders who mistreat animals.”

Chris Sherwood, the chief executive for the RSPCA said:

“We welcome the Sentencing Council updated guidance as it gives judges and magistrates clarity and clearly recognises animal cruelty in the guidance for the first time in what is a landmark moment.”

Richard Martin (RSPCA founder) said:

“The cases our officers investigate can be very complex and it is welcome that the guidance looks at factors like the number of animals harmed and the connection to financial gain which our officers on the frontline witness when seeking to bring perpetrators to justice.”

Prosecutions

The RSPCA is the primary agency responsible for investigating and prosecuting animal cruelty and welfare offences involving domestic and wild animals. The police and other agencies are also involved in the investigation of such offences and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) will prosecute on behalf on some of these agencies.

The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the actions of a defendant constituted cruelty to an animal, however, there are some potential defences that may need to be considered and possibly raised, depending on the circumstances.

Defences

Below are some examples of what may amount to a defence for an allegation of animal cruelty:

Lack of intent or knowledge

This would be an argument to advance if the accused had no intention or knowledge that their actions caused the harm to the animal, in other words there was no necessary intent for cruelty.

Taking reasonable steps to care for the animal

This defence could be advanced in circumstances where all necessary steps were taken to care for the animal, such as providing the animal with adequate food and water, however, harm resulted beyond the defendant’s control.

Self defence

This type of defence may be advanced if a defendant’s actions towards the animal were reasonable and proportionate to avoid harm to oneself, another person or property.

The above is not an exhaustive list and there are other types of defences that may be raised dependant on the circumstances, for example carrying out legal fishing or a vet putting an animal down or carrying out surgery because it was in the animals’ best interests.

It is important to understand that offences and defences need to be looked at individually and, on a case-by-case basis and in some cases, it may be appropriate to seek expert opinion to support a defence or to demonstrate that a person acted reasonably or in line with permitted or acceptable standards.

Olliers Solicitors – specialist criminal defence solicitor

It is important to seek legal advice if faced with an offence of this nature as the penalties can be severe and there may be possible defences to explore.

If you require a specialist criminal defence lawyer please contact us by telephone on 0161 8341515 (Manchester) or 020 38836790 (London), by email to info@olliers.com or complete the form below to send us a message.