For a lot of people, disputes over our furry friends (or feathered/scaled/shelled or otherwise – we don’t discriminate!) can be just as emotionally charged as negotiating time with children. We often witness first hand, the deep distress and conflict that can arise when separating couples must decide who keeps the family pet.
The Emotional Toll of Pets Post-Separation
In some cases, former partners agree to “share” their pets, transporting them between homes on a regular schedule. However, without a legally enforceable framework, these informal agreements are fragile and vulnerable to breakdown.
In other situations, one party may leave the family home, either by choice or necessity, and be forced to leave behind a beloved pet due to uncertainty about their living arrangements or legal standing. We have even had situations where one party has initiated a court event and, whilst the other party is attending Court, have arranged to have the family pets removed from their home!
The unfortunate reality is, however, that it is not uncommon for one party to effectively use a pet as leverage, holding onto the animal to gain advantage in settlement negotiations.
2025 Amendments
The Australian Federal Government made a number of changes to the Family Law Act earlier this year aiming to make property and financial settlements safer, simpler, and fairer, particularly where family violence is involved. One of those changes was to include specific provisions around the treatment of pets following separation.
Pets Recognised as “Companion Animals”
Following the amendments, the law now formally recognise pets as “companion animals.” This gives the Court the power to make orders regarding pet ownership during a property settlement.
When making these decisions, the Court must (insofar as they are relevant) consider factors such as:
- The circumstances in which the pet was acquired;
- Who currently has possession or ownership of the pet;
- The level of care and financial support each party provided;
- Any history of family violence or cruelty toward the pet;
- The emotional attachment of any party (or children) to the pet; and
- Each party’s demonstrated ability to care for and maintain the pet.
Not all pets are considered companion animals, however, and these provisions do not apply to assistance animals, those used as part of a business (for example, if some creative accounting sees tax deductions for your guard dog’s weekly wagyu) or for agricultural purposes.
Options available
Whilst the terminology now used and factors the Court is to have regard to make it seem like pets will no longer be treated as items of property following separation, it is important to note that the Court can only make orders for a single party to have ownership of a pet, for ownership to be transferred or for a pet to be sold.
Addressing Broader Forms of Family Violence
In addition to pet custody, the amendments have also resulted in significant reforms aimed at recognising and addressing economic and financial abuse within relationships. Specifically, an expanded definition of family violence now includes:
- Unreasonably denying financial autonomy;
- Unreasonably withholding financial support; and
- Dowry abuse.
The Court is now also considering the economic impact of family violence both during the relationship and after separation, as well as the care and housing needs of children when determining a property settlement.
If you have a particular family law matter you wish to discuss, contact our experienced family law team for a confidential discussion on (03) 9481 2000.