From Chattels to Companions: A New Era for Pet Ownership in Family Law

Legislative Change

In June 2025, the Family Law Amendment Act 2024 (Cth) introduced new provisions relating to family pets. This marked a significant shift from the Court's previous approach, where pets were treated as "chattels" (property), rather than being recognised for their role as companions - often considered by families as members of the household, and in some cases, akin to children.

The amendments establish a specific framework for dealing with companion animals in property settlement proceedings, separate from the treatment of other property.

Definition of "Companion Animal"

The legislation defines a companion animal as an animal kept by parties to a marriage or de facto relationship primarily for companionship. However, this definition excludes:

• Assistance animal as defined under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992;
• Animals kept for business purposes;
• Animals used for agricultural purposes; or
• Animals kept for laboratory tests or experimentation.

Considerations of the Court

When determining who should retain the family pet, the Court must consider a range of specific factors, including:

• The circumstances in which the animal was acquired (e.g. gift, joint purchase, or owned prior to the relationship);
• Evidence of legal ownership or possession (e.g. registration details, microchip records);
• Each party's contributions to the care and maintenance of the animal (including daily care and financial support);
• Any family violence perpetrated by one party against the other;
• Any history of actual or threatened cruelty or abuse towards the animal;
• The emotional attachment of a party, or a child of the relationship, to the animal;
• Each party's capacity to independently provide for the animal's ongoing care; and
• Any other factors the Court considers relevant to achieving a just and equitable outcome.

Additional Necessary Consideration

Despite these legislative reforms, companion animals remain classified within property proceedings, meaning that the Court cannot make orders for shared ownership or shared care arrangements, as you would see for children. Instead, it is limited to determining sole ownership of the animal to one party.

Accordingly, it is important for clients to gather clear and persuasive evidence demonstrating their connection to the animal and their ability to care for it. This is particularly crucial when agreement cannot be reached between the parties and the Court is required to determine sole ownership.