AAS obtained legal opinion on the SPCA "having to" return animals to abusers if it is paid its "costs":

Alexander Holburn Beaudin and Lang,
Vancouver, BC
July 25, 2003:

"There is no express provision in the Act which specifically states that the SPCA must return the seized animal to its owner if the owner has paid all costs of the seizure and made attempts to improve the conditions that the animal was living under. However, it can be inferred that, in including subsection 25 (1), the legislature intended that in order for the SPCA to keep an animal in its custody permanently, the SPCA should apply to the Supreme Court for such an order. "

If the SPCA did not want Wes Norman to get his dogs back, it could have applied to the Courts for an Order to keep them.

But that would have put the seizure into the public forum, clearly something the SPCA wished to avoid and thought it had avoided by forcing the dogs' owners to sign gag orders.

It took Wes Norman's $2400 and returned dogs that we now learn may have been used for fighting, a criminal offence. This is very serious matter indeed. The warrant needs to be unsealed to see if it says that the SPCA suspected the dogs were used for fighting.