DPP v Wright
[2009] EWHC 105 (Admin)
Independent editorial summary โ not the official judgment. Read the full judgment via the source link.
Ratio Decidendi
The Hunting Act 2004 does not require proof that the hunt intended to chase the quarry. It is sufficient that hunting took place โ the offence focuses on the activity of hunting, not the subjective intention.
Facts
Members of a hunt were prosecuted under the Hunting Act 2004. They argued they were 'trail hunting' and did not intend to hunt a live fox.
Judgment Summary
The court held that the Hunting Act creates an objective test: was a wild mammal hunted with dogs? Intention is relevant only to the statutory exemptions.
Key Quotes
"The question is whether hunting took place, not whether the hunters intended it."
โ Owen J
Subsequent Treatment
Applied in subsequent Hunting Act prosecutions.
What To Do Next
Get Professional Help