Updated 4 November 2026
CM Law's Ultimate 50 List - Separated Couples FAQ #15: What are the legal rights regarding shared pets?
Deciding where a much-loved pet will live can be one of the hardest practical decisions after separation. Australian family law changed on 10 June 2025: companion animals now have a specific framework within property proceedings. Understanding that framework helps you make workable arrangements and avoid promises a court cannot enforce as pet-sharing orders.
What changed for family pets in June 2025?
Pets remain property under the Family Law Act, but qualifying companion animals now have their own decision-making framework. Courts consider specified matters including care, attachment and violence. They can allocate ownership to one party, transfer the animal to a consenting third person, or order a sale; they cannot order shared care.
The Court's family-pets guidance explains the current approach. Treat older articles cautiously, particularly statements that attachment never matters or that judges routinely order visits. The new framework applies to both married couples and eligible former de facto partners.
Does every animal qualify as a companion animal?
A companion animal is kept by either or both partners primarily for companionship. The definition excludes assistance animals within disability discrimination law and animals kept for business, agricultural or laboratory purposes. A family dog or cat will commonly qualify, but an animal's actual purpose matters more than its species.
The 2025 reform guidance explains that excluded animals are dealt with under ordinary property principles. Tell your lawyer if an animal has a working, breeding, assistance or commercial role. Calling it a pet does not settle the classification.
Does the registered owner automatically keep the pet?
No. Ownership and possession are relevant, but registration is not the only consideration under the current family-law framework. The court also examines how the animal was acquired, past care and expenditure, attachment, safety and future care. Neither paying the purchase price nor having the animal now guarantees the final outcome.
Registration remains useful evidence. Explain whether the animal was bought together, received as a gift or brought into the relationship by one person. If someone outside the relationship claims ownership, that issue needs separate attention before proposing a transfer.
Which records should you gather?
Gather purchase or adoption documents, registration and microchip details, veterinary records, expense receipts and relevant communications. Record who actually provided daily care and when arrangements changed. Evidence should explain the animal's history and present needs, rather than simply collecting photographs or asserting that you love the pet more than your former partner.
Keep copies you can lawfully access and organise them by date. A concise care history can identify feeding, walking, medication and veterinary responsibilities. Preserve existing records; do not alter registration or remove documents to manufacture an advantage in the dispute.
How important is the ability to provide future care?
The court considers each person's demonstrated ability to care for and maintain the animal in future without the other person's support or involvement. A realistic proposal should address housing, daily availability, exercise, veterinary treatment and affordability. Past care matters, but it does not replace evidence that the proposed future arrangement can work.
Check whether your accommodation permits the animal and plan for work, travel and medical needs. Explain any established support arrangements accurately. Avoid proposing that your former partner must provide ongoing transport or payments to make your own care plan viable.
Can the court consider the children's attachment?
Yes. Attachment by either partner or a child of the relationship is an express consideration in the companion-animal framework. That does not turn the dispute into a parenting case about the pet. The court considers attachment alongside the other relevant factors, without automatically placing the animal wherever the children spend most time.
Describe the relationship calmly and avoid asking children to choose sides. Explain established routines and any practical effect on them. The Family Law Act contains separate rules for parenting decisions; the pet is not treated as another child under those rules.
What if there has been violence or threatened harm?
Tell your lawyer about family violence and any actual or threatened cruelty towards the animal. Both are express considerations. Safety may require urgent advice and temporary arrangements before a final ownership decision. Preserve relevant messages, veterinary evidence and existing protection orders, and avoid a handover that would expose anyone to danger.
Legal Aid NSW explains the factors applying to pets after separation. Negotiation should not become a condition of obtaining safety. Ask about suitable interim relief and safe communication; a pet dispute should not be used to pressure someone into unwanted contact.
Can you voluntarily agree to share the pet?
You may make a voluntary practical arrangement, but the family court cannot make shared-care or joint-ownership orders for a companion animal, including by consent. Do not describe an informal timetable as guaranteed court-enforceable access. Consider whether continued contact is safe and workable, and obtain advice about what happens if cooperation ends.
If both people wish to cooperate, record transport, medication, holidays and communication arrangements clearly. Consider the animal's routine and how disagreements will be handled. A written schedule alone does not overcome the statutory limits on the orders a court can make.
Who pays the animal's expenses during separation?
There is no automatic equal split of pet expenses simply because you have separated. Agree on immediate food, medication, insurance and veterinary costs where safe, and distinguish temporary payments from the final ownership outcome. Existing contracts with a vet, insurer or lender may create obligations that your private arrangement does not change.
Keep receipts and clarify approval for non-urgent treatment, alongside a plan for emergencies. Do not assume paying a bill purchases ownership or guarantees reimbursement. The proposed long-term owner should budget for care independently of unenforceable expectations about the other person's future contributions.
If you agree who should own the pet, proposed consent orders can include an ownership order within the court's permitted options. Identify the animal clearly and obtain advice on the wording and implementation. Agreement between the parties does not allow the court to approve joint ownership or a pet-visiting schedule.
The Court's agreement guidance distinguishes consent orders from financial agreements. Ask which legal mechanism suits your wider circumstances and any existing documents. Do not assume a homemade separation agreement settles all property claims or satisfies the requirements for a binding financial agreement.
What happens if you cannot agree?
Obtain advice about negotiation, appropriate dispute resolution and, if needed, an application for property orders about the pet. Pre-action procedures generally apply unless an exception applies. The court has a simplified filing pathway where the only orders sought concern a pet, but evidence and procedural obligations still matter.
The financial proceedings practice direction describes that pathway, including an affidavit and Genuine Steps Certificate. Urgent cases require specific justification. Weigh likely cost, delay and available outcomes before litigating; there is no reliable standard price or guaranteed timetable for a pet dispute.
Are there time limits for making a claim?
Property proceedings generally must start within twelve months after a divorce takes effect for married couples, or two years after a de facto relationship ends. You do not need to wait for divorce to address the pet. If time has expired, obtain advice about the applicable consent or leave requirements promptly.
The Court's time-limit guidance explains the usual rules and exceptions. De facto applicants must also satisfy the relevant eligibility and geographical requirements. Keep ownership issues on the settlement agenda rather than assuming they can always be dealt with after everything else.
What should happen when ownership changes?
Implement the agreement or order by arranging a safe handover and updating the appropriate ownership records. For NSW dogs and cats, follow the NSW Pet Registry or council transfer process. Also deal with veterinary records, medication, insurance and contact details so the person responsible can care for the animal properly.
Service NSW explains ownership transfers and registration requirements. Give the new owner relevant health information and equipment. An administrative registry change should reflect the lawful arrangement; it is not a substitute for resolving a contested family-law ownership claim.
Why must older pet cases be read cautiously?
Grunseth & Wighton [2022] FedCFamC1A 132 illustrates the earlier law. The appellate court ordered Ms Grunseth to retain Roxy, a spoodle, when reconsidering the parties' property division. Its statement that attachment was irrelevant must not be used as current guidance: legislation now expressly makes attachment a relevant consideration.
Both former de facto partners sought the dog. The court considered evidence about registration, purchase and ongoing expenses; Ms Grunseth was the registered and legal owner. On 26 August 2022, the appeal was allowed and replacement property orders included her retention of Roxy, with an $800 adjustment to Mr Wighton for the purchase price.
The published reasons describe a broader property appeal, not a current pet-custody formula. Keep the useful lesson about evidence while applying the post-10 June 2025 framework, which expressly considers attachment, future care and violence. No shared-care entitlement follows from this historical decision.
How can CM Lawyers help resolve a pet dispute?
CM Lawyers can assess the applicable framework, review ownership and care evidence, and help negotiate practical arrangements or suitable orders. Tell us about urgent safety concerns, existing agreements and any wider property proceedings. Our advice can distinguish a voluntary understanding from the ownership orders the court is legally able to make.
My practical advice is to address the pet early in your separation planning and property settlement. Contact CM Lawyers on (02) 9557 9000 or email lawyers@cmlaw.com.au to discuss the evidence and a workable next step.
General information only, current at 4 November 2026. Obtain advice about your relationship, pet, safety concerns and applicable law before acting.
Key resources
