Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

R v Paul Croft

[2023] EWCA Crim 1538
A man's dog attacked another dog, injuring both the dog and its owner. The man was given a long suspended sentence for this. The court decided the sentence was too harsh and reduced it.

Key Facts

  • Paul Croft (51) pleaded guilty to being the owner of a dog that caused injury while dangerously out of control, contrary to s.3(1) and (4) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.
  • Croft's Belgian Malinois cross-breed attacked the Cunningtons' puppy, causing injuries to the puppy and Mr. Cunnington.
  • The attack occurred while Croft was intoxicated and the dog was off its lead.
  • Croft had 20 previous convictions for 64 offences.
  • The offence occurred during the operational period of a suspended sentence.
  • The judge sentenced Croft to 17 months' imprisonment, suspended for two years.

Legal Principles

Sentencing Guidelines for offences under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991

Sentencing Council Guideline

Credit for guilty plea

Criminal Procedure Rules

Outcomes

The 17-month custodial sentence was quashed.

The court found that the sentence was manifestly excessive. The aggravating factors justified moving to the top of the sentencing bracket, but not beyond it. The pre-existing partially activated suspended sentence was considered.

The sentence was reduced to 10 months' imprisonment, suspended for two years.

The court considered the appropriate sentence after trial to be 12 months, reduced by 15% for the guilty plea, resulting in a 10-month sentence.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.