Welcome to the VIC Animal cruelty article page. Everything you need to know about Animal cruelty according to VIC law - Dated: 09/01/2009
1. The accused wounded, mutilated, tortured, overdrove, overworked, abused, beat, worried, tormented or terrified an animal or
2. The accused overloaded or overcrowded an animal or
3. The accused knowingly or negligently did or omitted to do an act. The act caused unnecessary, unreasonable or unjustifiable pain or suffering to an animal or
4. The accused drove, conveyed, carried or packed an animal. The accused did so in a manner which subjected the animal or was likely to subject the animal to unnecessary pain and suffering or
5. The accused knowingly or negligently worked, rode, drove or used an animal. The accused did so in circumstances where the animal was unfit for that purpose or
6. The accused was the owner or has possession or custody of an animal. The animal was confined or otherwise unable to provide for itself. The accused failed to provide the animal with proper and sufficient food or drink or shelter or
7. The accused sold, offered to sell, purchased, drove or conveyed a calf. The calf appeared to be unfit. The calf was unfit because of weakness to be sold, purchased or to be driven or conveyed to its intended destination or
8. The accused abandoned an animal. The species of animal is usually kept in a state of confinement or for a domestic purpose or
9. The accused was the owner or has possession or custody of a sick or injured animal. The accused knowingly, negligently or unreasonably failed to provide appropriate attention or treatment to the animal or
10. The accused intentionally administered to or laid bait for an animal. The substance administered or the bait contained a (a) poison; or (b) other substance which has a harmful effect on the animal. The administration of the substance or the laying of the bait was not in accordance with the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994, the Wildlife Act 1975 or the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 or
11. The accused used spurs with sharpened rowels on an animal or
12. The accused cropped the ears of a dog. The operation was not done on the advice of a veterinary practitioner for the purpose of a therapeutic or prophylactic effect on the dog or
13. The accused debarked a dog. The debarking was not on the advice of a veterinary practitioner and in accordance with a Code of Practice pr
14. The accused docked the tail of a horse. The operation was not done (a) on the advice of a veterinary practitioner for the purpose of a therapeutic or prophylactic effect; or (b) providing for the safety of the horse if it is a working horse
1. At the time of the alleged offence, the owner had entered into an agreement with another person by which the other person agreed to care for the animal.
2. Honest and reasonable mistake.
3. Person acted reasonably; or reasonably omitted to do an act - in defending himself or herself or any other person against an animal or against any threat of attack by an animal.
4. Necessity.
5. Factual dispute.
