Victoria takes owner of 'dangerous' dog to court over alleged bylaw violations

The Victoria provincial courthouse as seen on November 3, 2021. (CTV News)

The City of Victoria has won an injunction against a resident it claims has repeatedly breached its Animal Responsibility Bylaw by failing to control his dog.

According to court documents, Michael Evans was issued at least seven tickets in 2022 for violations of the bylaw related to his dog Darla, which was designated a "dangerous dog" under the bylaw on Feb. 25.

In a decision issued last week, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Saunders granted the city's request for interlocutory injunctions requiring Evans to obtain a valid dog licence for Darla and to comply with the dangerous dog provisions of the bylaw. 

An interlocutory injunction is one that is put in place while a case is before the courts. In this case, the injunctions will remain in place until a decision is made on the city's petition for longer-term injunctions, or until Feb. 25, 2024, whichever comes first.

The court decision describes Darla as a "pitbull catahoula cross breed," though it notes that Evans denied that the dog is a pitbull.

In support of its petition, the city submitted affidavits from animal control officers, neighbours of Evans and two members of the public, one who claimed to have been bitten by Darla, and the other who claimed their dog was bitten by Darla.

"Mr. Evans filed no affidavit evidence in answer to Victoria’s application," Saunders wrote in his decision.

"On the hearing of the application, he submitted that his dog is not dangerous. He denies that his dog has ever bitten anyone. He disputed the sufficiency of the steps taken by Victoria to notify him of the dangerous dog designation. He described the designation as 'arbitrary.'"

The judge noted that the question of whether Darla is dangerous was not for the court to decide when considering the city's application.

"The dog has been designated as dangerous," Saunders wrote. "Mr. Evans has not taken steps to challenge that designation. It is open to him to seek judicial review of that designation, through filing a petition with this court. Unless that designation is overturned by this court, or its operation suspended, the designation is presumptively valid and lawful, and Mr. Evans must fulfill the duties of an owner of a dangerous dog as set out in the bylaw."

Saunders further noted that photos provided to the court as evidence show that Evans had not fulfilled such duties.

Evans conceded that Darla had been allowed outside without being restrained and had been walked without being muzzled or leashed, in violation of the bylaw, according to the decision.

"The evidence clearly establishes a strong prima facie case that Mr. Evans has breached the bylaw repeatedly and in numerous respects," the judge wrote. "There are no exceptional circumstances that would justify Victoria not being granted the remedy it seeks."

Saunders therefore ordered Evans to obtain a licence for Darla and keep the dog licensed throughout the court proceedings.

He also ordered Evans to comply with the bylaw by:

• Displaying a dangerous dog sign on his property
• Keeping Darla confined inside his home except when she is restrained on a leash and properly fitted with a muzzle
• And immediately advising Victoria Animal Control Services Ltd. when the dog is loose or if the dog has bitten or attacked any person or animal

Saunders also awarded court costs to the city.