The High Court has upheld the ban on XL Bully dogs in England and Wales, rejecting legal challenges from owners and campaign groups. This landmark ruling comes after months of intense debate, with ministers citing an “alarmingly high” number of fatal attacks involving the breed as justification for the crackdown.
A lawful ban amid controversy
Sophie Coulthard, an XL Bully owner, and the campaign group Don’t Ban Me, Licence Me brought legal action against the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). They argued that the ban, enforced under the Dangerous Dogs Act since February, was based on unreliable evidence and lacked a proper analysis of its impact. However, Mrs Justice Lang dismissed most of these claims, stating that the government had sufficient grounds to proceed with the ban.
The court heard evidence of 11 fatal attacks attributed to XL Bully dogs between January 2020 and September 2022. The judge noted that, even excluding cases with doubts about the dogs’ breed, the data supported the government’s concerns. “There was sufficient evidence of an alarmingly high level of fatal attacks by XL Bullies or their crossbreeds to justify the defendant’s concerns,” Mrs Justice Lang said.
Challenges to the ban
Critics of the ban, including legal representatives for the campaigners, argued that the government acted hastily following a fatal dog attack in September 2023. They claimed there was no concrete analysis linking XL Bullies to a disproportionate number of attacks compared to other breeds.
Cathryn McGahey, representing the claimants, questioned the reliability of the evidence, noting that XL Bullies make up a fraction of the UK’s dog population. She highlighted inconsistencies in estimates of the breed’s numbers, with government figures suggesting 10,000 XL Bullies while campaigners claimed over 57,000 were registered.
Ms McGahey also criticised the focus on breed-specific bans, pointing out that irresponsible breeding and ownership were broader issues contributing to dog aggression. “Banning by type doesn’t work. Irresponsible breeders and owners will simply move on to another breed,” she argued.
A limited victory for campaigners
While most aspects of the legal challenge were dismissed, the court did find that the government had failed to fully comply with public sector equality rules during the early stages of the ban’s implementation. However, Mrs Justice Lang declined to mandate changes, citing a subsequent lawful equality assessment conducted in May.
The campaigners’ concerns about the potential for criminalising unsuspecting owners were also acknowledged. Without an official XL Bully definition, critics warned of vague standards leading to pets being unfairly seized or euthanised.
Public reaction and breed advocacy
Supporters of XL Bullies have been vocal on social media, sharing videos that showcase the dogs as gentle family companions. Sophie Coulthard, founder of the campaign group Bully Watch, described her dog Billy as the “ideal family companion” and dismissed the portrayal of the breed as inherently violent.
Ms Coulthard criticised what she called a “moral panic” surrounding XL Bullies, fuelled by high-profile attacks and sensationalised media coverage. “Terms like ‘devil dogs’ and ‘Franken-bully’ create unnecessary fear and lead to knee-jerk reactions,” she said.
Enforcement and impact
Under the new laws, owning an XL Bully without an exemption certificate is a criminal offence, and unregistered dogs may be seized. By June, dogs older than one year were required to be neutered, with younger dogs facing the same requirement by December.
More Read
Since the ban’s implementation, data shows an average of 16 dogs seized daily in the UK, highlighting the scale of enforcement. However, critics argue that focusing on breed-specific measures overlooks the root causes of dog aggression, such as poor breeding practices and inadequate training.
A spokesperson for Puppies.co.uk said, “The Dangerous Dogs Act has been in place for over 30 years, yet dog bite incidents continue to rise. Addressing root causes, rather than targeting breeds, is essential.”
Tragic consequences
Despite the ban, fatal attacks have continued, with at least six deaths linked to XL Bullies since February. Among the victims was Angeline Mahal, a woman in her 50s who was killed by her two registered XL Bully dogs in May.
The government has defended its decision, with ministers describing the ban as a necessary step to protect public safety. Defra’s lawyer, Ned Westaway, argued that XL Bullies shared characteristics with fighting dogs like pit bulls, making them a legitimate concern.
A divisive debate
The ban on XL Bullies has sparked nationwide debate, raising questions about the effectiveness of breed-specific legislation and the broader issue of dog aggression. While the High Court ruling brings clarity, it leaves behind unresolved concerns about responsible ownership and animal welfare.
For now, XL Bully owners like Ms Coulthard face an uncertain future, caught between the love for their pets and the harsh realities of the law.
