TWO “dangerous” dogs due to be euthanised last Thursday after escaping their owners’ Frankston property and killing two pet cats have won an 11th hour reprieve after an appeal was lodged with the Supreme Court.
Charlie, a male mastiff cross, and Sharni, a sharpei female cross, were just hours from being put down when Frankston Council was informed by a barrister representing the owners that an injunction had been sought.
It is understood an anonymous donor provided financial assistance to owners Evan Jeremiejczyk and Shannon Holt to fund a Supreme Court appeal.
A council spokesperson confirmed the injunction late on Thursday.
“We have been informed that a Supreme Court injunction is to be lodged by the dog owners’ barrister this afternoon,” the spokesperson said.
“Our CEO met personally with the dog owners today to let them know the service provider currently housing the dogs has been informed to postpone any further action at this time.”
The dogs were impounded on 8 November after they escaped their owners’ property and allegedly killed two cats. However, only one of the cat deaths was recorded as the second cat owner failed to appear in court.
Frankston mayor Cr Darrel Taylor said the dog owners were informed by council in advance of the Magistrates’ Court hearing on 27 February that the charges were serious and “should the presiding magistrate find the owners guilty, it may result in their two dogs being humanely euthanised”.
“Evidence confirmed the dogs absconded from their property as a result of the fencing being inadequate and mauled and killed a cat, with evidence of a second killing obtained from a witness who was unable to attend court,” Cr Taylor said.
“The owners have been infringed previously for their dog being allowed to wander, not being registered or desexed. Fines imposed have still not been paid by these dog owners and remain lodged with the Infringements Court, despite the owners being offered a repayment plan by council. While the dog owners are of the belief that their dogs no longer pose a threat, council must consider the safety of the community as its priority.”
