Appeal — error in law — dog ownership disqualification — Dog Control Act 1996, ss 25, 26, 27, 28, 57 — District Court Rules 2014, r 18.20, 18.24. The appellant sought to appeal a five-year disqualification as a dog owner. The appellant received infringements for separate offending relating to his failure to follow the law regarding the control of his dog. There was no issue with the dog's obedience. The Council disqualified the appellant as a dog owner for the maximum five years and, as a consequence, he was required to dispose of the dog. The appellant filed an appeal under s 26 of the Act to the territorial authority . The Council upheld its decision but no reasons for the decision were given; the provision of reasons is statutorily required under s 26. The Judge considered the arguments put forward by the appellant (although the error in law was not raised by either party) finding that the most compelling factor to be that the length of disqualification was the maximum period available. The Judge viewed this as too severe and reduced the disqualification period to an effective two and a half years. The Judge considered each party should bear their own costs, as the Council had made a fundamental error in law under s 26, while the appellant was successful on appeal but unsuccessful on the remaining merits. Judgment Date: 21 November 2018.