For many Australians, a pet isn’t just property—it’s a member of the family. However, when a relationship ends, the question of who keeps the dog can become a deeply emotional point of contention. If you are navigating a breakup, seeking expert family law legal advice is the first step in understanding your rights regarding your “companion animals”.
A Shift in the Law: The 2025 Amendments
Since the June 10, 2025, amendments to the Family Law Act (FLA), the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia has been granted specific powers to determine who retains the family pet. Under the new legislation, a “companion animal” is defined as any animal kept by the parties for companionship.
It’s important to note that this definition excludes:
● Assistance animals (such as seeing-eye dogs).
● Business animals (such as working guard dogs).
As family lawyers in Melbourne, we often see clients surprised by how the Court handles these disputes. Unlike children, where “shared care” is common, the Court generally dictates that only one party can keep the pet, or they may even order the animal to be sold.
How the Court Decides
When a family property dispute lawyer takes a pet ownership case to Court, the judge considers several key factors to reach a decision:
● Acquisition and Registration: Who originally bought the pet and whose name is on the registration papers?
● History of Care: Which party was primarily responsible for daily care and financial maintenance (vet bills, food, etc.)?
● Conduct: Any history of family violence or cruelty towards the animal is heavily scrutinized.
● Independence: The ability of either party to maintain the pet’s lifestyle without support from their former partner.
● The Human Connection: The level of attachment between the pet and any children involved in the legal separation in Melbourne.
Case Study: Wright and Berger (September 2025)
A recent case highlights why a “shared custody” approach for pets rarely works in a legal setting. In Wright and Berger, the parties had successfully resolved their broader family law property settlement and parenting arrangements but remained deadlocked over their 16-year-old dog.
The mother had owned the dog years before the relationship began. While the father eventually conceded ownership, he requested that the dog travel with the child during visitation, effectively seeking a “shared care” arrangement.
The Verdict: The Court ruled that it does not have the power to make “shared use” orders for a pet. The mother was declared the sole owner, and no orders for shared care were granted.
Seeking Expert Guidance
Whether you are dealing with a complex property settlement or simply want to ensure your pet’s future is secure, working with an experienced family law firm in Melbourne is essential. From parenting agreement lawyers to divorce settlement lawyers, having the right team in your corner makes all the difference.