In the words of Paulette Bonafonté from Legally Blonde: “I’m taking the dog!”
And now, thanks to the Family Law Amendment Act 2024, Paulette can seek orders to retain the dog.
Previously, legislation treated pets as property. Your Labrador? Same category as the fridge. Your cat? An IKEA sofa (however IKEA furniture is a lot easier to understand). For many separating couples, the fight for the pet is just as real as the house. Maybe even more as the pet doesn’t come with a mortgage.
The Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) has been amended to recognise pets as companion animals and acknowledges the pet isn’t “property”. They’re “Teddy”, “Bella” or, in my case, “Sage”.
A “companion animal” is the pet you keep for love, not business. Your poodle counts, but your sheep farm doesn’t. Your parrot counts, your lab rats don’t.
Now, the Family Court can make orders as to whether:
- Party A keeps the pet;
- Party B keeps the pet; or
- The pet must be sold.
The consideration for orders is not quite a “which human does the pet love more?”. The Court considers who bought the pet, who feeds, walks, and pays for it, whether there’s been any cruelty, and attachments between the pet and any children. So, yes, your dog’s Instagram page can be used in support.
But what if we both love the pet? Can we have a shared care arrangement? Despite popular demand, the Court can’t make “shared care” arrangements for pets. No alternating weekends, no doggy handovers at the park, no shared vet bills.
While the law hasn’t yet caught up to the idea of “pet parenting plans”, it has at least moved past treating your pet like the dining table (though neither actually listens when called). And that’s progress.
Thanks to the amendments, the law finally acknowledges pets as more than furniture, but Paulette reminds us that, sometimes, it’s the heart (and the perm) that makes the strongest case.
