Update June 13, 2009:  Last fall, an appeals court upheld the province of Ontario’s broad pit bull ban. Now, the Canada Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal from that ruling.
Clayton Ruby, attorney for Catherine Conchrane, a Toronto pit bull owner, argued before the Court that the definition of "pit bull" is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad because it snares dogs that are mixes and mutts or have no pit bull in them at all. He argued the law includes dogs that pose no danger at all to anyone or other animals.
Ruby also said there is no evidence and specifically no scientific evidence to support the Crown’s claim that there is a "reasoned apprehension of harm" from "pit bulls" to justify the ban.
The Appeals Court disagreed that the ban is unconstitutionally vague or overbroad, thus reversing the Superior Court decision described in Animal Law Coalition’s earlier report below.
The Appeals Court also ruled that "pit bulls" are dangerous and unpredictable dogs that have the potential to attack without warning.  The Appeal court said in its decision, "The total ban on pit bulls is not ‘arbitrary’ or ‘grossly disproportionate’ in light of the evidence that pit bulls have a tendency to be unpredictable and that even apparently docile pit bulls may attack without warning or provocation".
The Supreme Court has now refused to disturb that finding. The 3 judge panel gave no reason for its refusal to hear the case.
Michael Doi, attorney for the government, has called "pit bulls" the "automatic weapon of the dog world.". Â
Original report: An Ontario Superior Court Justice struck down parts of the province’s law relating to pit bull breeds.
The court found the definition of "pit bull" is unconstitutionally vague. The definition cannot include "pit bull terriers" though other pit bull breeds including those with "substantially similar" characteristics may continue to be banned.
The court also found the law does not allow use of a veterinarian to prove a dog’s breed.
The ruling did not otherwise affect the law’s broad ban on pit bulls. Clayton Ruby, the attorney for the plaintiffs who were challenging the law, issued a statement explaining, "We saved ‘pit bull terriers’ but not the other breeds".
Justice Thea Herman said in her ruling, "The evidence with respect to the dangerousness of pit bulls, although conflicting and inconclusive, is sufficient, in my opinion, to constitute a ‘reasoned apprehension of harm’.
"Dog ownership is not a right. The impact of these restrictions on individual dog owners is not, in my opinion, disproportionate to the objective of protecting the public."
The justice made clear her job was to determine whether the law was constitutional, not whether it was good policy.
Ontario’s Restrictions on Pit Bulls
American Staffordshire terriers, Staffordshire bull terriers or any other breeds sharing ‘substantially similar’ characteristics are banned in the province of Ontario. Specifically under 2005 amendments to the Dog Owners’ Liability Act (DOLA), no one may own, breed, transfer, import, or abandon pit bulls.
Pit bulls already in Ontario at the time of the ban or born within 90 days of August 29, 2005, have been ‘grandfathered’ and will be allowed to live out their lives.
Owners cannot train the dogs to fight. They must keep them confined and must leash and muzzle their dogs in public. Muzzles must be strong enough to prevent the dog from biting but at the same time allow the animals to breathe, pant, see and drink. Leashes for pit bulls must be no longer than 1.8 meters.
All pit bulls must be spayed/enutered.
Penalties include a $10,000 fine ($60,000 for corporations) or six months imprisonment or both. The court can also order the owner to pay restitution to a victim of a dog bite or attack. The owner is liable for damages regardless of fault. The animal can be taken away or destroyed.
I AM AANIMAL LOVER OF ALL KINDS; WHY DOES THE GENERAL PUBLIC SAY VISIOUS DOG BECAUSE OF PIT BULL ANY AND ALL DOGS COULD BECOME VISIOUS IF MISTREATED, INBRED AND SO ON WE AS RESPONSABLE OWNERS NEED TO CARE FOR AND MAKE SURE ALL DOGS BE KEPT UNDER SUPERVISION THE BREED OF PIT BULL OR STADFORD TERRRIE SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO LIVE AND BE LOVED AS ANY OTHER BREED, TEACH AND GUIDE, AND REHABLITATE WHERE EVER POSSIBLE ANY BREED OF DOG COULD BECOME DEPENDING ON THE CERCOMSTANCES, BUT MANY TIMES CAN BE PREVENTED.
All changes to this law were reversed on appeal.
Appeal Decision
Dog Owner`s Appeal was dismissed
Government`s cross appeal was allowed.
http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions/2008/october/2008ONCA0718.pdf
Lawyers Statement
http://www.animalfarmfoundation.org/pdf/Ontario.pdf
A motion to be heard at the Supreme Court of Canada has been filed
Ontario Canada has been raising funds through a “Dollars for Dogs” Campaign to continue this Challenge
http://www.dogsincanada.com/blog/?p=175
BSL is a Worldwide Fight
Let`s help them continue this fight.
“Calgary dog attacks fall to lowest level in 25 years
City a leader in reducing canine problems, says top bylaw officer”
http://www.calgaryherald.com/Life/Calgary+attacks+fall+lowest+level+years/1313555/story.html
A snippet
[quote]..Brandy Campbell-Biggs, president of Pit Bulls For Life, a non-profit animal rescue operation geared specifically toward pit bulls, said targeting bad owners instead of stigmatizing entire breeds is the key to reducing aggressive incidents.
While dog bites have been going down, the number of pit bulls coming to the city has been increasing, she said.
She doesn’t know how many there are in the city, but her organization has placed 160 pit bulls in foster homes or with permanent adoptive owners in Calgary over the past three and a half years.
Pit Bulls For Life brings the dogs in from jurisdictions with breed-specific legislation that sees many breeds deemed dangers, including pit bulls, targeted for euthanasia. She said 20 per cent of the dogs they help come from Ontario….[/quote]
Calgary Animal Bylaw Services
Talk to them
http://content.calgary.ca/CCA/City+Hall/Business+Units/Animal+and+Bylaw+Services/Animal+Services/index.htm
[quote]Update June 13, 2009: Last fall, an Ontario appeals court upheld the province’s broad pit bull ban. Now, the Ontario Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal from that ruling.[/quote]
It`s not Ontario`s Supreme Court,it`s Canada`s Supreme Court(SCC) that has dismissed the motion to be heard.
http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/information/cms-sgd/dock-regi-eng.asp?33067
Important Ontario(Canada) case
The News Story
Lawyers for the City of Toronto and the Province of Ontario win the right to appeal.They will continue to try and kill the victim(Ginger the pit bull)) of a dog attack
http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20090617/pitbull_oca_090617/20090617/?hub=TorontoNewHome
This case is extremely important
It concerns the interpretation of the Ontario law and will set legal precedent
R. v. Huggins, 2009 ONCJ 155 (CanLII) — 2009-04-06
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2009/2009oncj155/2009oncj155.html
Former Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant Charged
Michael Bryant(The former Ontario Liberal Attorney General) who introduced the Legislation(Bill 132) which banned 3 recognized Breeds and “substantially similar” dogs in Ontario and legislated Ontario Citizens into 2nd class citizens has been charged with criminal negligence causing death and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death(in an apparent Road Rage Incident).
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/michael-bryant-in-police-custody/article1271489/
Michael Bryant will be presumed innocent until proven guilty in an Ontario Court of Law.(As it should be)
Meanwhile the owners of the 3 recognized Breeds and all mutt owners with a certain look(a.k.a Ont. Gov. ‘pit bulls’) will continue to be presumed guilty and will have to attempt to prove their innocence in an Ontario Court.
2 Tier Justice System in Ontario?
If you would like to express your opinion or you concern about this discrepancy in the Canadian Justice system, here is the contact Info.
All Ontario Liberal MPP`s
(They all voted for discrimination and to strip some Ontario Citizens of their right to be presumed innocent)
http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_current.do?locale=en&list_type=liberal&go=go
Ontario Premier McGuinty
http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_detail.do?locale=en&ID=66
Attorney General Chris Bentley
http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_detail.do?locale=en&ID=2123
Please cc your correspondence to the
Leader of the Opposition
Mr Tim Hudak
http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_detail.do?locale=en&ID=48
and to the
Critic,Attorney General
Mt Ted Chudleigh
http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_detail.do?locale=en&ID=16
NCRC has more here
http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-news/
Ontario MPP Cheri DiNovo has introduced a Private Member`s Bill to amend the Dog Owner`s Liability Act and Animals for Research Act
This Bill now called
Bill 222, Public Safety Related to Dogs Statute Law Amendment Act, 2009
will remove the Breed Specific aspects.
The Bill passed first Reading yesterday in the Ontario Legislature
The progress of the Bill can be followed here
http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/bills/bills_detail.do?locale=en&Intranet=&BillID=2245
This is how a Private Member`s Bill becomes Law in Ontario,Canada
http://www.ontla.on.ca/bills/general-information/files_pdf/files_en/pmpbill.pdf
It is very important no matter where you live to send letters of support to this Ontario MPP
Contact Info here
http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_detail.do?locale=en&ID=7044
Depending where you live you can do the following along with sending letters to Ms DiNovo
In Ontario,cc your own MPP
http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_current.do?locale=en
Outside of Ontario, also cc the Minister of Tourism
http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_detail.do?locale=en&ID=2130
Outside of Canada,also cc the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_detail.do?locale=en&ID=7065