3 Aug 2022
AUCKLAND COUNCIL v PAUL [2022] NZHC 1898
- Citation
- [2022] NZHC 1898
- Court
- High Court
The High Court allowed the appeal because the District Court misapplied s 57(3) by treating the premises as the dog's private space, improperly characterising the complainant's attempt to pat the dog as provocation, drawing speculative inferences about the dog's psychology and relying on post-incident behaviour; none rendered the circumstances 'exceptional' and therefore an order for destruction of Zeus was required under s 57(3).