Our Cases

 

Lawyers for Companion Animals have assisted pet owners in over 200 cases involving their pets. We are pleased that many former clients, rescue groups, dog trainers, other lawyers and even council officers are referring work to us.

 

Ziggy and Lyn_n

One of our clients and her dog Ziggy. Council wanted to declare Ziggy Dangerous but we managed to persuade council to not proceed with the Dangerous Declaration. Council then declared Ziggy a Nuisance dog. This expired after 6 months and Ziggy has been on best behaviour ever since.


 

Types of matters we have been involved in and provided advice and representation include:

 

  • Dog Attack matters. Menacing dog. As a consequences of a dog attack where council has issued a Notice of Intention to declare dog Menacing. In 100% of these Menacing dog cases we have been successful in persuading council not to declare the dog Menacing. Dog attack cases are serious matters that require a high level of expertise and experience to achieve such results. Before you engage a lawyer in these types of matters ask them how much experience they have had in these types of matters. Don’t gamble with the outcome with an inexperienced representative. Having a Menacing Dog Declaration imposed on your dog has serious consequences.

 

  • Dog Attack matters. Dangerous dog. As a consequences of a dog attack where council has issued a Notice of Intention to declare dog Dangerous. In 100% of these Dangerous dog cases we have been successful in persuading council not to declare the dog Dangerous. In 100% of these Dangerous dog cases we have been successful in persuading council not to declare the dog Dangerous. Dog attack cases are serious matters that require a high level of expertise and experience to achieve such results. Before you engage a lawyer in these types of matters ask them how much experience they have with these types of matters. Don’t gamble with the outcome with an inexperienced representative. Having a Dangerous Dog Declaration imposed on your dog has serious consequences.

 

  • Dog Attack matters. Revocation of Dangerous Dog Declaration. Lawyers for Companion Animals have been involved in a number of these matters where we have written to council requesting that the Declaration be revoked. In 100% of our matters Council has revoked the Declaration.

 

  • Dog Attack matters. Restricted Breed Dog. We have been involved in a number of these matters in NSW where following an alleged attack, the council issued a Notice of Intention to declare the dog Restricted. In one case the Restricted Breed declaration was not proceeded with, then council issued a Notice of Intention to declare the dog Dangerous, then we argued against that and council did not proceed with declaring the dog Dangerous. Eventually the dog was declared Menacing which was a better outcome than having a Restricted Breed dog.

 

  • Dog Attack matters. Lawyers for Companion Animals have been involved in a matter where council applied to the Court for a Destruction Order. We assisted the dog owner find a resolution that did not involve the killing of the dog.

 

  • Dog Attack Matter. We were involved in a matter where a decision of Frankston council was challenged in the Victorian Supreme Court. This matter involved two dogs killing a cat. The council’s position was that the dogs should be killed. After filing paperwork with the Supreme Court the council reconsidered its decision so it was not necessary for the Victorian Supreme Court to decide the matter. Frankston Council agreed to pay our clients costs. However after re-considering its original decision to kill the dogs Frankston council again decided to kill the dogs, Charlie and Sharni. Even though we considered that the clients could also appeal this decision of Council, clients chose not to do this. So in effect, while we “won” on an administrative law matter the council did not reverse it’s decision and the dogs were killed. A behavioural assessment of the dogs was completed by an experienced veterinary behaviorist which determined that the dogs were not aggressive in any way towards humans or other dogs. There were offers on the table to re-home the dogs to RSPCA SA, RSPCA QLD and Monika’s Doggie Rescue. All reasonable options were refused. This was one of the most heart-breaking cases we have been involved in. We deal with many councils and most of them are fairly reasonable.

 

  • http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/inner-south/frankston-councils-decision-to-destroy-two-dogs-unnecessary-and-despicable-says-lawyer/story-fngnvli9-1226980648488

 

  • Dog Attack Matter. Lawyers for Companion Animals have assisted clients obtain the best sentencing outcome when they have pleaded guilty to a dog attack. In many cases this involves not getting a criminal record, minimal fines and the dog not being destroyed and/or declared Dangerous.

 

  • Assistance with pet ownership disputes. A microchipped dog was impounded. Microchip was not properly scanned by council staff. Council transferred ownership of dog to Rescue group. Dog scanned at vet when dog went in for desexing. Result was original owner bought his dog back from rescue group. This might seem unfair but if there were not rescue groups the dog would have likely have been euthanised. The cost of buying his dog back (from rescue group) was less than impounding fees that original owner would have been charged for his dog being in the pound.

 

  • Assistance with pet ownership disputes. In another case a dog was impounded that did not have a microchip. The owner of the dog saw the photo on Facebook and rang the rangers and informed them that it was her dog and that she would come in to collect. Due to a number of council administrative errors the council rehomed the dog to another person. In this case I negotiated with the new dog owner and my client (original dog owner) was able to get her dog back.

 

  • Dispute with council – a family living in a residential area had many cats. Council alleged client was running a cattery. Neighbours complained about odour. Client asked for permission to keep more than 3 cats. Council refused. Client ran the risk of council prosecuting her for $200,000. Ms Greenaway attended mediation which provided for a gradual de-stocking of the cats and avoided a $200,000 fine. Client eventually moved to a property with zoning which would allow her to keep the majority of her cats.

 

  • Animal cruelty/neglect. Quite a few people contact Lawyers for Companion Animals raising concerns about treatment/neglect of dogs and/or cats (usually by neighbours) and wanting assistance. Sadly in a number of cases it appears that RSPCA NSW fails to take appropriate action when it comes to animal neglect cases as this is an ongoing concern that has been raised by several different people across the state.

 

  • Barking dogs. Lawyers for Companion Animals have acted for a number of people who both have had barking dogs complaints made against them and people who have raised concerns about barking dogs.

 

  • Disputes with pets in accommodation. Lawyers for Companion Animals have assisted a number of people regarding disputes with pets in both residential and commercial premises.

 

  • Concerns about dogs consuming 1080 baits. Lawyers for Companion Animals have been contacted by several people whose pet dogs have died as a result of eating a 1080 bait.

 

  • Cattery lost cat. Lawyers for Companion Animals have assisted a client whose cat was lost by a cat-boarding establishment.

 

  • Dog killed whilst at groomer. Lawyers for Companion Animals have assisted a client whose dog was negligently killed whilst in a dog grooming facility.

 

  • Dog killed by another dog whilst at dog boarding facility. Lawyers for Companion Animals have assisted a client whose dog was negligently killed by a dog boarding facility.

 

  • Pet Insurance dispute. Lawyers for Companion Animals have acted for a client with a dispute involving a pet insurance company not paying when a claim was made.

 

  • Vet Negligence. Lawyers for Companion Animals have assisted a number of people regarding inappropriate veterinary care, including misdiagnoses, that led to death and suffering.

 

  • Death of pets in council pounds. Lawyers for Companion Animals have assisted a number of peoples whose pets have negligently died (either through lack of care or euthanasia) while in the care of council pounds.

 

  • Injury to trapped cat. Lawyers for Companion Animals assisted a cat owner whose cat was trapped and whose claws were badly injured during trapping.

 

  • Death to trapped cat. Lawyers for Companion Animals assisted a cat owner whose cat was killed after being impounded at the Lost Dogs Home in Melbourne