After sharing a dog or cat with a partner for several years, the animal is no longer simply a ‘pet’ but a member of the family you have built together.
But after a break-up, if the other person simply takes the pet away because ‘I bought it’ or ‘the microchip is registered in my name’, and even refuses to return it, many people feel helpless.
So who legally owns the pet? Does the purchaser or the person named on the microchip registration necessarily have the advantage?
The answer is: information about the purchaser and registered owner is important, but it is not the only factor that determines who gets the pet.
Since 10 June 2025, Australian family law has had a dedicated framework for determining ownership of family pets. The court will consider the pet’s origin, its day-to-day care, who paid its expenses, each person’s relationship with the pet and who will be better able to provide stable care in the future.
What Is a Pet in Legal Terms?
Many people believe that, because a pet is family, the law should treat it in the same way as a child.
Under current Australian law, however, pets still fall within the category of ‘property’ rather than being subject to ‘custody’ arrangements like children.
That said, a companion animal is not treated in exactly the same way as ordinary property.
A companion animal generally means an animal kept by spouses or de facto partners for companionship, such as a family dog or cat. Assistance animals, animals kept for commercial purposes and farm animals do not fall within this category.
Although pets are property in law, the courts expressly recognise that they differ from assets such as houses and cars. The purchase price alone is therefore not enough; the court must also consider the genuine day-to-day connection between each person and the pet.
Does the Pet Automatically Belong to the Person Named on the Microchip Registration?
Not necessarily.
A purchase contract, adoption papers, microchip registration, government registration and veterinary records may all be taken into account, but no single document automatically determines who will ultimately receive the pet.
For example:
- one person paid the purchase price and registered the microchip;
- but the other person spent years feeding and training the pet and arranging veterinary appointments;
- and it was also the other person who took time off work to care for the pet when it was ill.
In those circumstances, the court may find that the long-term, practical caregiving relationship better reflects each person’s connection with the pet than the purchase record alone.
Likewise, who spent more money is not the only consideration.
Veterinary and food expenses are, of course, important. But so too are the time spent walking, training and accompanying the pet, arranging appointments and caring for it when needed.
What Factors Does the Court Consider When Deciding Who Gets a Pet?
If the parties cannot reach agreement, the court will generally consider:
- how the pet was originally acquired, such as by purchase or adoption, or who brought it into the relationship;
- whose name the pet is currently registered in and who actually cares for it;
- the expenses and day-to-day responsibilities each person has undertaken;
- the emotional bonds between the pet and each person, as well as any children;
- who will be able to provide a stable and safe living environment in the future;
- whether there has been family violence, cruelty to the pet or a threat to harm the pet.
The court’s focus is not on who would ‘miss the pet more’, but on:
who can offer the more practical and stable arrangement for the pet’s future care.
For example, the court’s assessment may be affected if one person travels frequently for work, lives somewhere unsuitable for a pet or has previously had almost no involvement in its care.
A child’s affection for and close relationship with the pet may also be considered, but this does not necessarily mean that the pet will live with the person with whom the child lives.
Can We Ask to Have the Pet One Week Each?
The parties may, of course, privately agree to take turns caring for the pet.
However, if the matter goes to court, it is important to understand that the court will not make pet-care arrangements such as ‘weekly handovers’ or ‘holiday visits’ in the way it might arrange shared care for a child.
Under current family law, the court can generally decide only that:
- the pet is to be owned by one of the parties;
- the pet is to be transferred to a third party who is willing to receive it;
- the pet is to be sold.
If the parties choose to share care, it is therefore best to agree in advance:
- who will make medical decisions;
- how expenses will be shared;
- what will happen after a move or other change in circumstances.
Otherwise, further disputes can easily arise.
Is It Different If the Other Person Uses the Pet to Threaten You?
Yes.
In practice, some people say things during a break-up such as:
‘If you leave, I’ll give the dog away.’
Others deliberately conceal the pet’s location or prevent the other person from seeing it.
More seriously, a person may use a pet as a means of control, even threatening to harm it to force the other person to give in.
Current family law expressly requires the court to consider family violence and whether either person has abused or threatened to abuse the pet.
If there is an immediate risk that the pet will be harmed, sold or abandoned, seek legal advice as soon as possible and consider whether an application for interim court orders may be necessary.
What Should I Do If the Other Person Secretly Takes the Pet?
In this situation, the most important step is to avoid escalating the conflict.
You should not:
- enter the other person’s home without permission to take the pet back;
- forcibly take the pet in a public place;
- trade property, children or money for the pet.
These actions may make the situation more complicated.
More prudent steps include:
- clearly stating by text message or email that you want to resolve the pet-care arrangements, and retaining the correspondence;
- keeping purchase, registration and veterinary records, together with evidence of day-to-day care;
- trying to resolve ownership of the pet through negotiation as part of the overall property arrangements;
- promptly consulting a lawyer about whether court orders may be needed if the pet could be moved, sold or harmed.
You should also first confirm the legal nature of the relationship:
If the parties were married or in a de facto relationship as defined by family law, the matter can generally be dealt with under family law. If they were merely dating or living together without such a relationship, ownership of the pet may need to be determined under state law.
A Reminder from NS Legal’s Lawyers
A pet that has been your companion for years may have shared some of the most important moments in a relationship. Losing that pet during a break-up can be an extremely painful experience.
Although the law classifies pets as ‘property’, the court will not look only at a purchase invoice or microchip registration. It will consider:
- who genuinely cared for the pet;
- who can continue to provide it with a stable home;
- whether anyone has used the pet to control or harm the other person.
If your pet has become an irreplaceable member of your family, its legal classification does not make your feelings unimportant.
If you are involved in a dispute over a pet, you are welcome to speak with NS Legal’s family-law team. We can help you understand your existing rights and find a more suitable way forward.
