Definition of hold?

Galway K9

Had a friend mind my dog over the weekend, and dog warden demanded a dog license for him, none there at the time. Just need to clarify what the definition of hold is with regards to the law?

Does the below law, mean that the person minding dog has a dog license on them at the time for the particular dog but doesnt neccessarily have to be under that address or person minding him.

Also can i get the definition of keep.?

Prohibition on keeping a dog without a licence.
2.—(1) Subject to section 5 of this Act, it shall be unlawful for any person to—

(a) keep a dog unless he holds either—

(i) a dog licence for that dog, or

(ii) a general dog licence, or

(b) take possession, unless he is the holder of a general dog licence, of a dog, pursuant to a change of ownership, before the issue of a dog licence in respect of that dog, or

(c) transfer possession of a dog pursuant to a change of ownership to any other person unless the other person is the holder of a dog licence for that dog or a general dog licence.

(2) The occupier of any premises where a dog is found shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be the person who keeps the dog unless he proves that—

(a) he is not the owner of the dog, and

(b) the dog was kept on the premises either—

(i) without his knowledge, or

(ii) by some other person who had a licence for the dog.

Mr. Incognito

They are given their ordinary meaning.

There is no requirement to keep it on your person but you are required to have a licence for your dog.

It's not rocket science. All your friend has to say is that he was minding the dog for you and you can produce your licence for the dog.

You do have one?

Galway K9

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

They are given their ordinary meaning.

There is no requirement to keep it on your person but you are required to have a licence for your dog.

It's not rocket science. All your friend has to say is that he was minding the dog for you and you can produce your licence for the dog.

You do have one?

Yup thanks.

conorh91

Galway K9 wrote: »

Also can i get the definition of keep.?

Keep (vb.) ]from Old English cepan]; to have or retain possession of sth; e.g. 'You be keeping a dog licence'

MarkAnthony

cerastes

Aside from saying "its the law" what reason on earth do you need a dog licnece for?
I could understand if there was some correlation between numbers of licences, their fees being used for something related or administering a service.
What purpose does it serve?

Do I need a licence for a cat? or a fridge?

MarkAnthony

cerastes wrote: »

Aside from saying "its the law" what reason on earth do you need a dog licnece for?
I could understand if there was some correlation between numbers of licences, their fees being used for something related or administering a service.
What purpose does it serve?

Do I need a licence for a cat? or a fridge?

Cat no, fridge you pay into the recycling fund whatsit.

Dogs require the infrastructure around them funded, basically because people are idiots.

cerastes

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Cat no, fridge you pay into the recycling fund whatsit.

Dogs require the infrastructure around them funded, basically because people are idiots.

But what infrastructure?

MarkAnthony

cerastes wrote: »

But what infrastructure?

Dog wardens, people that pick up the ****e, the bins, the signs.

cerastes

Fair enough, but in effect from what Ive experienced most of that is non existent, plenty of people will tell you the dog wardens are uncontactable, Ive a mind to test this as someone local to me releases their dog to take a sh$t on the local green space, aside from that its a bigish and fairly aggressive dog.

As for the bins, signs, a pittance really in the overall expenditure of a council.

Im uncertain if anyone goes around picking up dog sh%t and I doubt it, there is plenty of it around where unwilling dog owners just leave their pets to it right in front of them.

MarkAnthony

Bearing in mind the licence is only €20 a year, of course.

Mr. Incognito

cerastes wrote: »

Aside from saying "its the law" what reason on earth do you need a dog licnece for?
I could understand if there was some correlation between numbers of licences, their fees being used for something related or administering a service.
What purpose does it serve?

Do I need a licence for a cat? or a fridge?

So if the dog attacks someone they can trace the responsible owner.

dr.fuzzenstein

Galway K9 wrote: »

Had a friend mind my dog over the weekend, and dog warden demanded a dog license for him, none there at the time. Just need to clarify what the definition of hold is with regards to the law?

Does the below law, mean that the person minding dog has a dog license on them at the time for the particular dog but doesnt neccessarily have to be under that address or person minding him.

Also can i get the definition of keep.?

Prohibition on keeping a dog without a licence.
2.—(1) Subject to section 5 of this Act, it shall be unlawful for any person to—

(a) keep a dog unless he holds either—

(i) a dog licence for that dog, or

(ii) a general dog licence, or

(b) take possession, unless he is the holder of a general dog licence, of a dog, pursuant to a change of ownership, before the issue of a dog licence in respect of that dog, or

(c) transfer possession of a dog pursuant to a change of ownership to any other person unless the other person is the holder of a dog licence for that dog or a general dog licence.

(2) The occupier of any premises where a dog is found shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be the person who keeps the dog unless he proves that—

(a) he is not the owner of the dog, and

(b) the dog was kept on the premises either—

(i) without his knowledge, or

(ii) by some other person who had a licence for the dog.

The person looking after the dog, if he/she is not the owner, would not need a dog license. Otherwise it would be impossible to run a kennels.
You as the owner are the keeper and need to hold a license. If you leave a dog with a friend, a kennels, a vet or grooming parlor, it is still your dog.
Unless you give or sell the dog to your friend, then he/she needs a license.
The term of ownership should be clear enough unless you and your friend are co-owners?

cerastes

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

So if the dog attacks someone they can trace the responsible owner.

Wut? so in cross examination, they ask the dog for the licence, they put both paws up and say "fair cop guvnor" as dogs have an armpit pocket to keep the licence? whereas cats dont and just flip them the claw??

In seriousness, I dont see how the licence aids in tracing the owner? you said a person doesnt have to keep it on them, the dog wont have it on them either???
Microchips being mandatory would help that, but really the govt doesnt have animal welfare at heart, or they would introduce legislation to regulate puppy breeding and other things which contribute to animal welfare, maybe if the licence fee went towards promoting and maybe funding animal nuetering.

I dont see how a licence fee of any cost, no matter how affordable helps a responsible owner, it would be better to insist all dogs are microchipped, anyone declining should have to state a reason why, if its to breed then they should have to register, any dog found without a chip should be collected or if a person claims ownership be given the option of having their dog chipped or fined, I still dont think licences are needed, its just a way of saying, Im charging you x something I want to charge you for, regardless of what service is at the end of it.

Dogs collected in any area, seem to be? dealt with animal charities, dog wardens or the council should have a list of organisations they go to. Chipped dogs could be dealt with easier.

I know not all would comply with this, but it would be easier to determine on the spot.

dr.fuzzenstein

I presume a dog license dates back to a time where people where still honest and law abiding. Nowadays we have copped on to the fact that if we don't buy a license and say "Never seen that mutt before in my life" should something happen and act innocent/ignorant we can't be got for anything and therefore no problem.
So the law is now to microchip the dog and the whole "wasn't me, guv!" routing doesn't work. of course people will simply not get their dogs chipped and say "Never seen that mutt before in my life" should anything happen...
In other countries people say "How will this new law affect us?", in Ireland we say "How can I get around it?". There's just a fundamental difference in attitude here.

MarkAnthony

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I presume a dog license dates back to a time where people where still honest and law abiding.

What magical time was that?! :pac:

dr.fuzzenstein

MarkAnthony wrote: »

What magical time was that?! :pac:

Yeah, I'm trying to think, might have to go back a few years...:)