Henderson v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2018] EWHC 666 (Admin)
In order to answer the question posed, I would reformulate it and answer as follows:
1. Does an individual who has never owned, possessed or been in charge of a dog have standing to intervene in an application under s.4B(1) of the Dangerous Dogs Act to contend that the dog is not one to which s.1 of the Act applies?Answer: No: Only the owner of the dog or a person with a relationship to the dog such that its destruction would be an interference with his or her right to family or private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights has such standing.
2. Can an individual who has never owned, possessed or met a dog fall within the definition of a “person for the time being in charge” of the dog in s.4B(2A) of the Dangerous Dog Act 1991?
Answer: They may or they may not. The answer depends on an evaluation of the facts in the light of the decision in Webb v Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset, and in particular paragraphs [77], [78], [88] and [89].
3. Can the fitness of an individual who is neither an owner nor a “person for the time being in charge of the dog” be a relevant circumstance for the purpose of s.4B(2A)(b) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991?
Answer: No.
4. Does an individual who is neither the owner nor a “person for the time being in charge” of the dog have standing to contend that the dog would not constitute a danger to public safety?
Answer: No.