The attention of Scots Law News has been drawn to the case of Shufflebottom v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, 7 February 2003, Mackay J (Times, 13 February 2003) in which the learned and suitably named Mr Justice Mackay held in the Queen’s Bench Division that English justices had jurisdiction to hear a complaint under the Dogs Act 1871 where the owner of the dog complained of kept it within the commission area for which the justices were appointed, notwithstanding that the incident complained of arose outside their jurisdiction, viz in Scotland.  The dog in casu was called Trigger and lived with his owner in Stockport; the incident took place in Kirkcudbright (Dumfries and Galloway) in December 2001.  Trigger had there bitten the owner’s partner’s daughter during a family holiday, and her serious injuries required treatment in a hospital at Dumfries and subsequently in hospital at Cheadle Hulme.  Mackay J held that the issue under the 1871 Act as amended by the Dangerous Dogs Act 1989 was whether the dog was dangerous, not where its dangerousness had been made manifest.  The case was returned to the Stockport justices to determine whether to order that Trigger be kept under proper control or destroyed.