|Australia - Welfare - Animal Welfare Act 1992
|An Act for the promotion of animal welfare, and for related purposes.
|Australia - Anti Cruelty - POCTAA General Regulations 1996
|POCTAA Regs cl
|This Regulation is the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (General) Regulation 1996 for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (POCTAA) 1979. The regulations may prescribe guidelines relating to the welfare of species of farm or companion animals. Compliance or failure to comply with guidelines prescribed by regulation under this section is admissible as evidence in proceedings relating to compliance or failure to comply with POCTAA or the regulations.
|Animal Liberation Ltd v National Parks & Wildlife Service
| NSWSC 457
The applicants sought an interlocutory injunction to restrain the respondent from conducting an aerial shooting of goats as part of a 'cull'. The applicants claimed that the aerial shooting constituted cruelty as the goats, once wounded, would die a slow death. An injunction was granted to the applicants pending final hearing of the substantive action against the aerial shooting.
|RSPCA v O'Loughlan
| SASC 113
The appellant, the RSPCA, relied on the fact that a horse, once in RSPCA care, had a significantly improved condition in comparison to that described as 'emaciated' while in the respondent's care. The respondent claimed that the horse's condition fluctuated depending on the presence of mares in heat during summer and that she had tried several changes to the feed to counter a loss in weight. On appeal, the appellate judge did not disturb the trial judge's finding and confirmed that the respondent's conduct was reasonable in the circumstances.
|Animal Liberation (Vic) Inc v Gasser
|(1991) 1 VR 51
|(1990) Aust Torts Reports 81-027
Animal Liberation were injuncted from publishing words claiming animal cruelty in a circus or demonstrating against that circus. They were also found guilty of nuisance resulting from their demonstration outside that circus. On appeal, the injunctions were overturned although the finding of nuisance was upheld.
|AU - Rural Lands Protection Act 1998 (NSW)
|Rural Lands Protection Act 1998
An Act to provide for the protection of rural lands; to provide for the establishment of the State Policy Council of Livestock Health and Pest Authorities and the constitution of livestock health and pest authorities and the State Management Council of Livestock Health and Pest Authorities and for the functions of those bodies; to regulate travelling stock reserves, stock watering places and the transportation of stock by vehicle; to provide for the control of certain pests; and for other purposes.
|AU - Cruelty - South Australia Animal Welfare Act 1985 (SA)
|Animal Welfare Act 1985
The South Australian Animal Welfare Act’s primary purpose is for the promotion of animal welfare. The Act is enforced by RSPCA SA and is the primary piece of legislation that aims to protect animals from cruelty in South Australia. The Act generally governs domestic privately owned animals (pets).
|New Zealand - Animal Welfare - Code for Layer Hens 1999
|Code of Animal Welfare No. 18
|In New Zealand, hens are kept under conditions ranging from large commercial enterprises where the birds are totally reliant on humans for all their daily requirements to free-ranging hens which have access to outdoor runs or pasture. Provided those concerned with the day-to-day care of the hens treat them with skill and consideration, their welfare can be safeguarded under a variety of management systems. The code takes account of five basic requirements: freedom from thirst, hunger and malnutrition, the provision of appropriate comfort and shelter, the prevention, or rapid diagnosis and treatment, of injury, disease or infection, freedom from distress, and the ability to display normal patterns of behavior.
|Turner v Cole
| TASSC 72
RSPCA officers found a horse belonging to the applicant on the applicant's property and, after preparing the horse for transport, had to euthanise the animal when it collapsed. The applicant was convicted of failing to feed a horse which led to its serious disablement and eventual euthanisation. The applicant was unsuccessful on all issues on appeal and was liable for a fine of $4000 and prevention from owning 20 or more horses for five years.
|Animal Liberation Ltd v Department of Environment & Conservation
| NSWSC 221
The applicants sought to restrain a proposed aerial shooting of pigs and goats on interlocutory basis pending the outcome of a suit claiming the aerial shooting would constitute cruelty. It was found that the applicants did not have a 'special interest' and as such did not have standing to bring the injunction. The application was dismissed.