Item - 2021.DG15.1

The Dangerous Dog Review Tribunal:

1. Confirmed the determination of a dangerous dog, and directed that the conditions of the order remain in effect, and that the Tribunal forward the reasons for this decision to Krishna Mohan and the Executive Director, Municipal Licensing and Standards on or before March 5, 2021.

On February 22, 2021, the Dangerous Dog Review Tribunal issued reasons for its decision as follows:

The Dangerous Dog Review Tribunal was presented with a Dangerous Dog Order appeal. The Tribunal considered oral and written arguments from the Executive Director, Municipal Licensing and Standards, the Animal Care and Control Officer Jodi Savage, the Appellant Krishna Mohan who was represented by his son Nathaniel, as well as an Interested Party, namely Ada Lim the owner of the victim dog Lilly. In addition, the Tribunal considered written documentation in the form of support letters for Lizzy the dog for whom the order was being appealed.

The Tribunal determined that a dangerous act occurred and was committed by Lizzy the dog in question. Further it determined the Order, issued in accordance with the City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 349, Section 15, was so issued in accordance with the by-law. The Tribunal concluded the dangerous act was unprovoked and not in self-defence and even though it was the first dangerous act on record, the injuries inflicted were not proportionate to the threat perceived, and were so severe that the victim dog succumbed to her injuries, and the order was justified.  

The Tribunal accepts the following evidence.

1. The victim dog Lilly was being walked by her owner Ada Lim. Ms. Lim indicated since they were only planning on going a short distance on a familiar route, she had not leashed Lilly.
2. When they crossed the road after exiting her house Ms. Lim said Lilly took off and ran towards Lizzy who was being walked by Sheila Mohan. Lilly ran about 100 yards to reach Lizzy barking all the time on the way.
3. Lizzy picked up Lilly in her mouth and swung her around like a rag doll. Unfortunately, Lilly died from the attack in spite of rapid veterinary care. This was the first dangerous act on record for Lizzy with the City. However, the Tribunal felt the severity the attack justified the Dangerous Dog Order.
4. Although not an eye witness Nathaniel Mohan testified, he believed Lizzy was protecting his mother who he felt would have been startled by Lilly. There was no compelling evidence presented to support this position.
5. Lizzy is a Siberian husky while Lily was a Yorkie Chihuahua mix so the ferocity of the attack was completely out of proportion with any consideration of self-defence.
 

Based on the evidence and for the reasons above, the Tribunal unanimously confirms the determination of the Dangerous Dog Order.

Appeal of Dangerous Dog Order issued, October 2, 2020, Appeal DDRT2021-03.