I think we are fighting a lost cause. The council seem adamant that they are 'following procedure' and have no choice other than to issue a licence. Here is their most recent response: "Thank you for your comments and your swift reply. I am. Of course familiar with the debate in Parliament. I know that the issue of sourcing puppies from puppy farms is emotive however where Council’s licence such establishments (Breeders) then procurement from them is in accordance with the Council’s conditions and thus the Law. The Act does provide for a right to appeal to a magistrates’ court by “any person aggrieved” by the refusal of a licence or by “any conditions subject to which a licence is proposed to be granted” It is submitted that the local authority must, therefore, before issuing a licence, give notice of proposed conditions to the applicant. The Act is silent on the matter of revocation and refers only to a court cancelling a licence under the Act of 1951 where the court has found a person guilty of an offence under the Act or under appropriate animal welfare legislation. The facts are that the Council has inspected the pet shop, confirmed that in the past year they have complied with the licence and attached conditions, that despite a number of complaints being received by the Authority, non were founded and that the Act allows for a licence to be issued. I stress that there have been no grounds for prosecution either by licensing, trading standards or the animal welfare officer in trading standards nor, I understand, the RSPCA. My answer to your comments regarding a “challenge in a court of Law” is qualified above. The Council’s position is therefore that which I stated in my earlier e mail. Regards Brian"