Separation is one of life’s most emotionally exhausting experiences. Dividing a home, finances, and a shared life is hard enough — but for millions of Australians, the question of who gets the dog, the cat, or the family rabbit can be just as fraught, just as heart-wrenching, and surprisingly, just as legally complex.
Australia is one of the most pet-loving nations in the world. Approximately 69% of Australian households own an animal companion, with 48% owning dogs and 33% owning cats. Given how deeply embedded pets are in our family lives, it is little surprise that disputes over companion animals are now a regular feature of separation proceedings. More than 30% of divorce cases now involve contested pet custody, and over the past decade there has been a 40% increase in pet custody disputes, with family lawyers reporting that around 15% of property disputes involve disagreements over pets.
Landmark changes to Australian family law — which came into effect on 10 June 2025 — have completely transformed how pets are handled when relationships break down. Yet for all the legal progress, the court process remains a slow, costly, and emotionally draining way to resolve what is, at its core, a deeply personal dispute. Family mediation offers something courts simply cannot: a tailored, compassionate, and privately negotiated outcome that puts your pet’s wellbeing — and your own — first.
How Australian Family Law Previously Treated Pets
For decades, Australian family law treated pets the same way it treated a dining table or a television set — as personal property, or “chattels,” to be divided like any other asset.
This approach, while legally tidy, was emotionally tone-deaf. Courts focused on questions of title and ownership documentation rather than the bonds of care, love, and companionship that people share with their animals. The landmark case of Downey & Beale [2017] FCCA 316 illustrated this tension clearly: both parties sought to keep their dog, neither assigned any monetary value to the animal, and both simply expressed their deep love for him. The court acknowledged this emotional significance — but was ultimately constrained to treat the dog as a chattel and determine ownership accordingly.
This framework left many separating Australians feeling that the legal system simply did not understand the role their pet played in their family. The calls for reform grew steadily louder.
The Game-Changing 2025 Reforms: Pets as “Companion Animals”
The 2025 changes to the Family Law Act represent the most significant overhaul of Australian family law in decades, and the treatment of pets is one of its most headline-grabbing elements.
From 10 June 2025, when considering what order, if any, to make about family pets, the family law courts must consider a specific list of matters that apply only in relation to family pets. This framework was introduced through the Family Law Amendment Act 2024 (Cth), which amended the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
Under the new legislation, pets are now legally recognised as “companion animals,” a distinct category that acknowledges their unique role in families. This change allows courts to consider a broader range of factors when determining pet custody, moving beyond mere ownership rights.
The Attorney-General’s Department has confirmed that these changes apply to all separating couples — whether married or in a de facto relationship — across Australia.
What Qualifies as a “Companion Animal”?
Under the new definition, a companion animal is an animal kept primarily for companionship by one or both parties to a marriage or de facto relationship. Most family pets — for example, dogs, cats and similar household animals — are companion animals, while working livestock, commercial breeding animals and service animals are not.
Specifically excluded are:
- Assistance animals under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)
- Animals kept as part of a business
- Animals kept for agricultural purposes
- Animals kept for laboratory tests or experiments
A working sheep dog, for instance, would not qualify as a companion animal if its primary purpose is herding livestock, even if the family is also emotionally attached to it.
What Courts Must Consider: The Eight Factors
When a separating couple cannot agree on who keeps the family pet, and the matter proceeds to court, the judge is now required to weigh up a specific and comprehensive list of factors. In determining the allocation of a companion animal, the court is mandated to consider: the circumstances of the animal’s acquisition; indicators of legal ownership or current possession; the extent of each party’s contribution to the animal’s care and maintenance; any family violence perpetrated by one party against the other; any history of actual or threatened cruelty or abuse towards the animal by a party; the emotional attachment of a party, or a child of the relationship, to the animal; the demonstrated capacity of each party to provide for the animal’s future care independently; and any other fact or circumstance the court deems relevant to achieving a just and equitable outcome.
In practical terms, this means that whoever has been the primary carer — walking the dog, booking vet appointments, paying for food and grooming, attending obedience classes — now has clear grounds to demonstrate a stronger claim. It also means that evidence of abuse, whether towards the animal or towards a partner, is directly relevant to the outcome. The reforms expressly seek to protect victims of domestic violence and their pets.
What Courts Can — and Cannot — Order
One of the most important limitations of the new framework is what a court cannot do. The court cannot make orders for shared ownership or shared care.
The court can only order sole ownership, a consented transfer or sale of a pet. It cannot consider or make orders for shared care arrangements. Assistance animals and animals kept for business, agriculture or laboratory use are excluded from the companion animal rules under the Act.
In other words, unlike children, there is no legal mechanism for “week-on-week-off” arrangements for your dog, or alternating holidays with your cat. If the matter goes to court, only one party can walk away with the pet. The other party loses all access.
You can however create a shared-care schedule in a private binding financial agreement or consent orders. This is a crucial point — and it is precisely where mediation and negotiated agreements offer something courts simply cannot.
Pets, Domestic Violence, and the New Protections
The intersection of pet disputes and domestic violence is a deeply serious and often overlooked dimension of family separation. Research indicates as many as 7 in 10 cases of domestic and family violence involve animal abuse. Further, it is often the case that pets are used as a tool of coercion or control against victim-survivors of domestic violence. A party may be especially susceptible to making unfair concessions if they know or suspect that the pet may be abused or neglected if retained by the other party.
The 2025 reforms directly address this power imbalance. If an abused partner is confident they would be allowed to keep their companion animal if they leave a violent relationship, there is a greater chance they will seek safety. If a victim has fled to accommodation where they cannot keep their pet, the new laws will allow for a court order to transfer the animal to another person — a safe person.
Where domestic violence is a factor in any separation, mediation may not always be the appropriate first step. If you or someone you know is experiencing family violence, please reach out to:
- 1800RESPECT: 1800 737 732 (24 hours, 7 days)
- Lifeline: 13 11 14
- Emergency services: 000
It is strongly recommended that you seek independent legal advice and safety planning support before engaging in any dispute resolution process where family violence is present.
Why Mediation Is the Smarter Path for Pet Disputes
For couples who are not in a situation involving family violence or safety concerns, mediation is by far the most effective, dignified, and affordable way to resolve a dispute over a family pet.
Here is why mediation wins — and why the courtroom loses — when it comes to companion animals.
1. Mediation Can Create Shared Care Arrangements — Courts Cannot
This is the single most compelling reason to choose mediation. If both you and your former partner want to maintain a relationship with your pet, a court can only give the animal to one of you. Mediation, by contrast, allows you to negotiate a mutually agreed shared-care arrangement — alternating weeks, school holiday schedules, or any arrangement that suits both parties and, crucially, the animal’s wellbeing.
These agreements can then be formalised through consent orders, giving them legal weight and enforceability, while still reflecting the genuine wishes and agreements of both parties rather than an imposed judicial outcome.
2. Mediation Is Significantly Faster and Cheaper
Taking a pet dispute to court is an expensive undertaking. Legal fees in contested family law proceedings can run to tens of thousands of dollars, and the matter can take months or even years to resolve. Mediation typically concludes in a single day or across a small number of sessions, at a fraction of the cost.
The financial reality of going to court for family law disputes is stark. The emotional and financial cost of litigation is rarely justified for a dispute that, with the right facilitation, can be resolved far more swiftly and collaboratively.
3. Mediation Considers the Pet’s Wellbeing, Not Just Ownership
Courts are constrained by legal frameworks. A skilled mediator, on the other hand, can help both parties focus on what is genuinely in the animal’s best interests: continuity of routine, veterinary needs, appropriate housing, emotional stability, and ongoing relationships with children in the family. These are the kinds of nuanced, practical conversations that a formal court process rarely has time for.
4. Mediation Preserves Your Ability to Co-Parent Effectively
Many separating couples share children as well as pets. The family dog or cat is often deeply connected to the children’s sense of comfort and continuity through an incredibly difficult time. A mediated resolution that keeps the animal accessible to the children — regardless of whose “turn” it technically is — serves the whole family’s emotional wellbeing in ways that a winner-takes-all court order simply cannot.
5. Mediation Is Confidential
Court proceedings become part of the public record. If personal matters about your relationship, your finances, or the circumstances of your separation are discussed in mediation, they remain completely confidential. This is particularly important for pet disputes, which can quickly involve sensitive revelations about the nature of the relationship and the conduct of both parties.
What to Bring to Mediation About a Pet
If you are heading into mediation and pets are on the agenda, preparation matters. Here is what can help support your position and contribute to a constructive conversation:
Documentation of care:
- Vet records, vaccination certificates, microchip registration
- Pet insurance policies in your name
- Receipts for food, grooming, boarding, or training
- Photos documenting your time and relationship with the animal
Practical considerations to raise:
- Who currently has the animal and where are they living
- Whether your new accommodation permits pets
- Whether children are attached to the animal and what contact arrangements exist for the children
- Whether the animal has any special veterinary or care needs
- Any concerns about the other party’s capacity or willingness to care properly for the animal
For a full guide to preparing for mediation, Mediations Australia has a comprehensive resource to help you approach the session with clarity and confidence.
How the Law Treats Pets in Western Australia
It is worth noting one important jurisdictional distinction. Property settlements for de facto parties in Western Australia are not dealt with pursuant to the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). The relevant legislation for de facto parties in Western Australia is the Family Court Act 1997 (WA), which had not been amended to reflect the changes in the Family Law Amendment Act 2024 as at October 2025.
Married couples in WA are still governed by the federal Family Law Act 1975 and the new companion animal provisions apply to them. However, de facto couples in WA should seek specific legal advice about how their state legislation applies to their situation.
Beyond the Dog: Horses, Birds, and Other Companion Animals
While dogs make up the majority of contested pet disputes, the new companion animal provisions are not species-specific. Any animal kept primarily for companionship — horses, birds, reptiles, rabbits, guinea pigs — potentially falls within the definition, provided it is not also used for agricultural, commercial, or laboratory purposes.
The emotional significance of these animals to their owners is no less real than that of a dog or cat, and mediation is equally well-suited to resolving disputes about them.
Getting Started: How Mediations Australia Can Help
Resolving a dispute about a beloved pet is about more than legal rights — it is about acknowledging the emotional reality of what that animal means to your family, and finding a solution that is genuinely workable for everyone involved, including the animal itself.
At Mediations Australia, our experienced mediators understand the full complexity of family separation, including the deeply personal dimensions of companion animal disputes. We provide a neutral, confidential, and compassionate environment where separating couples can have the real conversations that matter — and reach agreements that actually reflect the lives they are trying to build going forward.
Whether your situation involves a simple disagreement about who takes the labrador, or a more complex set of considerations involving children, domestic violence concerns, or multiple animals, we are here to help you find a path forward.
Book a consultation with Mediations Australia today — because your pet is a member of your family, and they deserve an outcome that reflects that.
Summary: Key Points to Remember
The 2025 reforms under the Family Law Amendment Act 2024 (Cth) have genuinely transformed how pets are treated when Australian relationships break down. The key points are:
- Pets are now legally recognised as “companion animals” — not mere property
- Courts must weigh a specific list of factors including care history, attachment, financial contributions, family violence, and animal cruelty
- Courts can only order sole ownership, transfer to a third party (with consent), or sale — not shared care
- Shared care arrangements can only be achieved by private agreement — through mediation or negotiation
- Mediation offers faster, cheaper, and more flexible outcomes than going to court
- Where domestic violence is present, safety planning and professional support should be sought before proceeding
