Sentencing — destruction of a dog — dog control — exceptional circumstances — Dog Control Act 1996, ss 57(2) & 57 (3) — Sentencing Act 2002 — Auckland Council v Hill [2020] NZCA 52, [2020] 3 NZLR 603, CA33/19, 12 March 2020 (CA). The defendant faced a charge owning a dog that attacked a person. The victim was known to the defendant and the dog. The victim had his hand over the dog, who was lying down. The dog then jumped up to bite the victim's hand. The defendant yelled for the dog to stop, which it did. The defendant drove the victim to the hospital where he needed stitches for his hand. The dog was seized after the defendant's neighbour called the council, because the dog had followed the neighbour's children. The dog had two previous infringement notices for jumping and scratching a person and chasing a chicken. The Court adopted a two step approach. In looking at the relevant circumstances of the offence, the victim entered the dog's space and the victim interacted with the dog in a friendly manner. In considering the exceptional circumstances, the Court found that the relationship between the victim and the dog was playful even after the offence. The Court found that the offence was unlikely to be repeated and that exceptional circumstances did exist. The defendant was ordered to pay a fine of $1,000. No order for the destruction of the dog was made. Judgment Date: 25 March 2022