France · Question · Question écrite
9715
Question 9715 — animals
Introduced
—
Last action
—
Status
posée
Sponsors
—
Subjects
Discovery layer
Source updated
—
Summary
Article L. 211-12 of the Rural and Maritime Fisheries Code distinguishes, among the types of dogs likely to be dangerous and therefore subject to specific measures, attack dogs, grouped in the 1st category, and guard and defense dogs, grouped in the 2nd category. The list of types of dogs falling under each of these categories appears in a decree of April 27, 1999, the annex of which details the elements of recognition of categorized dogs. If in doubt about the categorization of a dog resulting from a crossbreed, a morphological determination must be carried out from the age of eight months, when the dog has developed its definitive morphological characteristics. If the veterinarian considers that the dog corresponds to the criteria set out in the appendix to the decree of April 27, 1999, the owner or keeper of the animal must take action compliance with the obligations imposed on any owner of a categorized dog. Otherwise, the dog does not fall into any category within the meaning of article L. 211-12 of the rural and maritime fishing code. However, all dogs can be dangerous. Therefore, an uncategorized dog may be subject to a behavioral evaluation at the request of the mayor (article L. 211-14-1). Likewise, under Article L. 211-14-2, any dog (categorized or not) which has bitten must be subject to a behavioral evaluation. Following this evaluation, the mayor may require the owner or keeper of this animal to follow the training and obtain the certificate of aptitude mentioned in article L. 211-13-1 of the rural and maritime fishing code. This training, the content of which is provided for in the amended decree of April 8, 2009 setting the conditions for carrying out the training required to obtain the certificate of aptitude provided for in article L. 211-13-1 of the rural code, largely takes into account the environment in which dogs and humans live. It addresses in particular the question of prevention as the only method against the risks of aggression, the characteristics of the dog, a carnivorous predator living in groups, the main characteristics of development behavioral, the particularities of communication between dogs and humans, the dog's learning mechanisms or even the behavior to follow in the event of aggression. Finally, on the basis of I of article L. 211-11 of the rural and maritime fishing code, when a dog is likely, taking into account the conditions of its keeping, to present a danger to people or domestic animals, the mayor may prescribe, following the behavioral assessment of the animal, any measure likely to prevent danger, in particular the obligation for its owner or keeper to follow training and obtain the certificate of aptitude. In the event of non-compliance with these measures, the mayor may place the animal in a suitable storage location. The locally competent authorities have not reported any difficulties with the application of these legislative provisions nor have they formulated any request tending to adapt or supplement them. Therefore, there are no plans to modify these provisions, the current regulations being very comprehensive and already taking into account the dog's environment and the behavior of the owner.
Machine translation from French. The official text remains authoritative.
Timeline
No timeline events have been ingested for this record yet.
Votes
No vote records are attached yet.
Versions
No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.
Documents
No documents linked.
Sponsors
No sponsors or actors listed by the source.
Related records
No cross-record relationships stored yet.
Sources
PoliticalRepo is an index and interpretation layer, not the authoritative legal source.
- Official source: https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/15/questions/QANR5L15QE9715
- Open data entity: https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/opendata/QANR5L15QE9715