‘Precedent case’: £53k cost for council after Pit Bull type dog court battle

Max with new owner Molly Piper

A landmark case involving a Dundonald dog identified as a Pit Bull type has cost Lisburn and Castlereagh City Council (LCCC) more than £53,000.

The council this week released a detailed report following a court verdict earlier this month which confirmed that Max — the dog at the centre of the dispute — was a banned breed under UK law.

The case has created what LCCC described as a “precedent” for councils across Northern Ireland, establishing that registered keepers remain liable for dogs microchipped in their name, even if they claim to have sold or rehomed the animal.

The newly published report states:

“Now that the case has concluded and Max has been rehomed with his new owner, the council is in a position to provide a report.

“This report aims to set out the facts, from a council perspective, in the case of the abandoned dog known as Max.

“Costs incurred by the council in bringing this case forward include legal, kennelling, veterinary care, third-party assessments and behaviouralist intervention.”

Campaigners had launched a legal challenge after LCCC wardens assessed Max as a Pit Bull type, which could have led to his destruction under the Dangerous Dogs Act.

Following the court’s decision earlier in October, Max has now been rehomed — under strict restrictions — to Molly Piper of her family’s Mid Antrim Animal Sanctuary.

Financial Breakdown

The report details a legal bill of £35,423 up to 24 September 2025, following almost a year of legal proceedings.

Max had been found as a stray on the Comber Greenway in Dundonald after reportedly being “sold on Gumtree” by his original owner. He was seized by the council on 6 December 2024, with no registered keeper initially identified.

The council spent £9,518 on kennelling costs alone during the almost year-long case.

The report adds:

“It should be reiterated that it was never the intention of council for Max to be retained in kennels for this extended duration.

“During this period, we could not legally rehome the dog, either temporarily or permanently, as there is currently no provision for this in the legislation.

“The legal challenge did protract the process. Council respects the right of individuals to legally challenge its decisions.

“This case was a precedent for the council, other local government authorities and indeed central government.

“Registered keepers should remain liable for dogs that are microchipped in their name, despite the registered keeper in this case alleging that they sold Max to another person.”

Additional costs included £4,000 for third-party assessment — which involved travel expenses for a member of Merseyside Police — and a similar amount for a professional behaviouralist. Veterinary care totalled £315.

Council Staff Targeted Online

The council also confirmed that staff had faced online abuse amid misinformation circulating about the dog’s welfare.

The report states:

“There were approximately 150 Freedom of Information and Customer Care enquiries or complaints received, which were responded to by council officers within the policy deadlines.

“Council’s internal communications unit should be the primary source of information, internally and externally, regarding such matters.

“Protection of staff and their safety should be paramount. All threats should be reported to police and support of the council unequivocal.”