Pets are viewed by the Courts as personal possessions, and the legal position is usually that the person who paid for the pet is the legal owner and gets to keep the pet. The Court will also consider a variety of other factors, such as who pays for the day-to-day expenses for the pet and who is registered with the Kennel Club and on the microchip database.
However, in the recent case of FI v DO [2024] the Court was asked to decide who should retain the beloved golden retriever puppy, ‘N’. The Court acknowledged the evolving societal perception of pets as members of the family and a key factor that influenced the Court’s decision included the emotional well-being of N and the potential distress to both N and the children if separated. An important consideration was also who was the day-to-day primary caregiver for N and it was found that the wife had a consistent role in caring for N post-separation.
The Court ruled in favour of the wife and N was allowed to remain at her home. This case provides helpful guidance on the issue of pet ownership disputes and illustrates that Courts are increasingly recognising the emotional significance of pets in family life and that the pet’s feelings towards their carer is important. It is now not necessarily the person who purchased the pet who will retain ownership.
If you are going through a separation and are unsure about your rights when it comes to pet ownership, please do not hesitate to contact our family law team - Melissa Gire on email: meg@cooperburnett.com or Gemma Gillespie on email: gjg@cooperburnett.com or tel: 01892 515022.
This blog is not intended as legal advice that can be relied upon and CooperBurnett LLP does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of its contents.
