Plain language law

New Zealand law explained for everyone

Animal Welfare Act 1999

Conduct towards animals - Ill-treatment of animals

30: Strict liability

You could also call this:

"No excuse is needed to be guilty of hurting an animal, but you can defend yourself if you tried to prevent harm."

If you are charged with ill-treating an animal under section 29(a) of the Animal Welfare Act 1999, the prosecution does not need to prove you meant to do it. You can defend yourself if you can prove you took all reasonable steps not to ill-treat the animal, or if you were in a stressful situation and had to act to save human life. You can also defend yourself if there was a code of welfare in place at the time and you met or exceeded its standards, as outlined in section 29(a).

If you want to use one of these defences, you must tell the prosecutor in writing within 7 days of being charged, and explain which defence you plan to use. You will need to give details of what you did to try to prevent ill-treatment, or describe the emergency situation and why you had to act. You can also tell the prosecutor about the code of welfare you followed and how you met its standards, as outlined in section 29(a).

You must follow the right process to use these defences, or the court may not let you use them. The court can give you more time to tell the prosecutor about your defence if needed. You should be aware of the rules around section 29(a) to understand your obligations.

This text is automatically generated. It might be out of date or be missing some parts. Find out more about how we do this.

This page was last updated on

View the original legislation for this page at https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM50431.

Topics:
Crime and justice > Criminal lawEnvironment and resources > Farming and fishing
Previous

29: Further offences, or

"More ways you can break the law and hurt animals"

Next

30A: Wilful or reckless ill-treatment of wild animals or animals in wild state, or

"Harming wild animals on purpose or by being reckless is against the law and can lead to big fines or prison."

Part 2Conduct towards animals
Ill-treatment of animals

30Strict liability

  1. In a prosecution for an offence against section 29(a), it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that the defendant intended to commit an offence.

  2. In a prosecution for an offence against section 29(a) committed after the commencement of this subsection, evidence that a relevant code of welfare was in existence at the time of the alleged offence and that a relevant minimum standard established by that code was not complied with is rebuttable evidence that the person charged with the offence contravened section 29(a).

  3. Subject to subsection (3), it is a defence in any prosecution for an offence against section 29(a) if the defendant proves—

  4. that, in relation to the animal to which the prosecution relates, the defendant took all reasonable steps not to commit a breach of section 29(a); or
    1. that the act or omission constituting the offence took place in circumstances of stress or emergency, and was necessary for the preservation, protection, or maintenance of human life; or
      1. that there was in existence at the time of the alleged offence a relevant code of welfare and that the minimum standards established by the code of welfare were in all respects equalled or exceeded.

        1. Except with the leave of the court, subsection (2) does not apply unless, within 7 days after the service of the summons, or within such further time as the court may allow, the defendant has delivered to the prosecutor a written notice—

        2. stating that the defendant intends to rely on subsection (2); and
          1. specifying—
            1. where the defendant intends to rely on subsection (2)(a), the reasonable steps that the defendant will claim to have taken; and
              1. where the defendant intends to rely on subsection (2)(b), the circumstances of stress or emergency, and the reasons why the act or omission was necessary for the preservation, protection, or maintenance of human life; or
                1. where the defendant intends to rely on subsection (2)(c), the relevant code of welfare that was in existence at the time of the alleged offence, and the facts that show that the minimum standards established by that code of welfare were in all respects equalled or exceeded.

                Notes
                • Section 30(1A): inserted, on , by section 6 of the Animal Welfare Amendment Act 2002 (2002 No 53).