Dog Relocation as Confiscation and Proportionality in Animal Control

Following a dog bite incident where an owner's dog attacked a customer at a public facility, a lower authority ordered the mandatory relocation of the dangerous dog, which the owner appealed, arguing the measure infringed on property rights. The court reasoned that the mandatory relocation of a dangerous dog, as stipulated in cantonal regulation following a breach of animal handling laws, constitutes a confiscation (Einziehung) under Article 58 of the Criminal Code, thereby subjecting it to the principle of proportionality; although the relocation itself is a suitable measure to protect the public, the court found that imposing a muzzle requirement for the dog represented a less severe but equally appropriate and proportionate measure given the circumstances and the owner's efforts to control the animal.