The controversial law of the City of Montreal on pitbulls remain suspended for now, the judges of the Quebec Court of Appeal who heard the arguments of both parties in this case on Friday, having chosen to take the case under advisement .
The City was against a judgment of the Quebec Superior Court which suspended several provisions related pitbulls its regulations on animal control, which entered into force on 3 October.
The Montreal branch of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) had managed to convince the judge that a suspension was necessary until the merits of the issue to be debated.
Before the three judges of the Court of Appeal on Friday, the city solicitor, M e Claude Marseille, argued in particular that the suspension imposed in October by Louis J. Gouin judge should not have lasted more 10 days, which would have allowed the defense to hear his arguments and argue against-those presented by the SPCA, including those related to wear a muzzle.
The lawyer said that the urgency with which the case had been heard had prevented the city to adequately defend his point, illustrating his words by saying that it would be like if they were tied hands behind his back and that Carey Price then tried to score a goal.
SPCA of women lawyers have to their advanced by the lawyer who represented the city before Judge Gouin, M e René Cadieux did not request that the suspension is limited to 10 days.
The judges of the Court of Appeal will render their judgment in writing shortly.
The City Council voted Montreal, earlier this fall, for the adoption of regulations prohibiting the purchase of new pitbulls in Montreal and submit the current owners of such dogs to significant restrictions.
The regulation includes the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and any dog from a cross between one of the breeds listed or which has several morphological characteristics of breeds and crosses listed.
The Montreal branch of the SPCA believes that certain elements of the Regulation are discriminatory and unreasonable.
A major challenge is about how to identify a “pitbull-type dog”, as enshrined in the regulation.