Following reports of disruptions
Judges and court officials are set be issued with new guidance on allowing emotional support animals in court, following reports of disruptions caused by barking, growling, and even defecation.
An alert on the handling of emotional support animals was recently circulated to judges and will be followed by an official update to the court officials’ rulebook.
According to The Telegraph, the alert notes that emotional support animals are “not regulated, have not necessarily undergone any training nor serve a specific function, and in some instances may be little more than family pets; there have been examples of people bringing cats and lapdogs into courts and tribunals, without making any advance requests.”
The newspaper also reports incidents involving dogs jumping at or ‘attacking’ witnesses, while other parties have been affected by allergies and phobias. In one case from 2017, a defendant’s Staffordshire terrier reportedly urinated and defecated in the court’s foyer after sentencing.
Currently, the Equal Treatment Bench Book includes rules on guide, hearing, and other medical dogs — which are covered under equality legislation — ensuring they are allowed into courtrooms and given breaks and access to water. There is no guidance on emotional support animals, however.
A district judge, Clare Jane Hockney, recently wrote “there is concern that allowing the court users to bring in potentially untrained pets, claiming them as ESAs, could cause disruptions and significantly impact on the fairness of the hearing and the rights of others”. Hockney further noted “untrained pets” could “interfere with genuine assistance dogs by barking, jumping at or even attacking them. There is of course no requirement [for the court] to admit a regular pet.”
Until the Equal Treatment Bench Book’s next edition addresses this situation, court officials have been advised to follow Hockney DJ’s advice. Judges will ask parties to explain how the emotional support animal might assist their mental health and participation, usually via a medical or psychological report, plus request evidence of training – such as certificates.
Even then, the bench will balance this need with all the parties’ rights in the courtroom, retaining the right to exclude any animal not protected under equality law. Hockney DJ added: “A pet that is untrained and meets no evidenced mental health needs should not be permitted. Judicial oversight is vital as abuse of the use of ESAs could impact on those with genuine needs, and even lead to a general scepticism of genuine assistance dogs.”
Legal Cheek has previously reported on animals being brought to court, from an accused man stroking his cat whilst in the dock, to a small horse which defecated in a courtroom.