Lord Justice Beatson has criticised the RSPCA during a court case over the investigation of a pair of a dog breeders whose animals were unlawfully inspected by the charity 's officers . The RSPCA has been rapped by a High Court judge over a botched investigation into dog breeders suspected of causing unnecessary suffering to animals . The trial of Deborah Fuller , 55 , and Phil Sheldrake , 59 , collapsed after it emerged the animal protection agency used the wrong warrant to enter the couple 's property in Lawford , Essex . Senior judge Lord Justice Beatson today threw out an application by the RSPCA for judicial review of the decision to close the case - insisting it was important 'officers of the state ' respected the restrictions on their powers . The RSPCA was challenging a decision of district judge Kenneth Sheraton at Colchester Magistrates ' Court in June last year blocking the prosecution . Judge Sheraton excluded evidence obtained during a search of premises owned by Deborah Fuller , 55 , and Phil Sheldrake , 59 , who pleaded not guilty to 16 charges of causing unnecessary suffering to dogs and failing to take reasonable steps to meet their needs . The case related to 42 Ridgebacks and two Hamiltonstovare seized from Fuller and Sheldrake 's house in Lawford , Essex , in August 2013 , when RSPCA inspectors accompanied officers from Tendring Council and the police on to their property . The search led to RSPCA allegations that some 17 of the dogs were emaciated , six of them severely so , and one was suffering from a facial tumour . All the dogs are currently being looked after by the RSPCA . The trial was halted when it emerged that council officers had only obtained a search warrant to investigate complaints that the couple had caused a 'statutory nuisance ' because of the noise of the dogs barking and the smell coming from faeces that had not been cleared up . Judge Sheraton found there was no warrant issued allowing an inspection of the condition of the dogs . The judge put down to 'inexperience and misunderstanding rather than malicious intent ' that Fuller was advised that the EPA warrant permitted inspection of the dogs when it clearly did not . The RSPCA applied to the High Court in London for judicial review , arguing that even if the 'dominant purpose ' of the warrant granted under the EPA was to investigate a possible statutory nuisance , there was still scope for dogs found to be in poor condition to be seized and a criminal prosecution brought . The RSPCA went to the High Court to have the botched prosecution reviewed , but its claims were rejected . Dismissing the argument Lord Justice Beatson , sitting with Mr Justice Blake , said local council officers and the RSPCA had gone on to premises 'intent on carrying out a search for purposes for which they had not been authorised ' . Lord Justice Beatson said it was the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta and important to continue observing legal restrictions on 'officers of the state ' - and bodies like the RSPCA acting with them - entering private land . He said the case involved 'officers of the state aided by a well-funded charity , which does excellent work in many cases , using the power of the state to compulsorily enter land ' . He added : 'It is incumbent on officers of the state , and those who assist them in this way , to take care that the principle of legality that has protected us well over many centuries is observed ' .
Trial of two dog breeders accused of neglect collapsed over warrant row . RSPCA did not have the necessary powers to inspect the animals . Agency went to Fuller to have magistrates decision reviewed . But senior judge throws out claims , backing restrictions on officers .