Pets, separation and family violence – Changes to family law

Pets are part of the family for many Australians. Around 69 per cent of households have an animal, and for a lot of people their dog, cat or other companion provides emotional support, daily routine and genuine attachment.

Until recently the law did not reflect that reality.

Amendments to the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) that took effect on 10 June 2025 introduce an important change. Companion animals are now expressly recognised in the Act as a distinct category to be considered in property settlements.

The change does not turn animals into people under the law, but it moves the legal approach away from treating pets simply as chattels and toward a more nuanced process that includes the animal’s welfare and the context of family violence.

What changed

Companion animal defined

The Act now uses the term “companion animal” and treats it as a specific category of property that the court needs to consider in family law property proceedings.

New list of factors

The Court must consider a non-exhaustive list of factors when determining who retains a companion animal. These factors include:

• How the animal was acquired: Who purchased the animal, purchase price or if it was a gift.
• Legal ownership and possession: Registration details under state or territory law and where the animal has been living since separation.
• Contributions and care: Who paid for the animal’s expenses and who performed day-to-day care such as feeding, grooming, walking and vet visits.
• Family violence and threats: Any family violence to which a party or the companion animal was subjected or exposed, including threats to harm the animal.
• Actual or threatened cruelty: Evidence of cruelty or abuse by a party towards the animal.
• Emotional attachment: The emotional bond a party or a child has with the animal, and the comfort the animal provides, particularly to victim-survivors.
• Capacity to care: Aach party’s ability to independently care for the animal, including financial capacity.
• Other relevant circumstances: Any other facts that would lead to a just and equitable outcome.

Why this matters

• More than paperwork: Previously the Court commonly treated pets like other household goods. Now, while animals remain within the property framework, the Court must take account of welfare, violence and emotional attachment when making orders.
• Family violence recognised: The new provisions require consideration of family violence directed at people and at pets. That is important because coercive partners sometimes use threats or harm to animals as a means of control. The law now directs courts to treat that conduct as a relevant factor in property outcomes.
• Practical impact: The Court can make orders about companion animals, including transfer or sale, but it will only make orders that are just and equitable. The inclusion of companion animals in the Act makes it more likely courts will make clear, enforceable orders about who keeps the pet.

How family violence and protective measures fit in

State intervention orders remain important

Family violence protection orders are made under state and territory laws and remain the primary mechanism for immediate protection of victim-survivors. In some jurisdictions, intervention orders can require return of a pet or include conditions about contact with the animal.

No blanket federal protection order for pets

Unlike many US states, Australia does not yet have a national regime that automatically places pets inside protection orders. The new family law factors, however, require courts to consider threats or harm to a companion animal when resolving property disputes. This strengthens recognition of animal-related abuse in family violence settings.

Enforcement consequences

Where a state intervention order directs return of a pet and the order is breached, that breach can have criminal consequences. Family law orders dealing with companion animals provide another legal pathway to resolve disputes over pets after separation.

Here’s what you can do…

• Record ownership and care: Keep registration paperwork, receipts for purchase and vet bills, and records of day-to-day care. Evidence of financial and non-financial contributions helps the Court understand each party’s role.
• Document threats or abuse: If a partner has threatened or harmed the animal, keep dated records, messages, photos or vet reports. Those records can be relevant both in family violence matters and in property proceedings.
• Consider an intervention order if safety is at risk: For immediate safety concerns for a person or a pet, a state-based intervention order may be appropriate. Intervention orders can include terms about return of property, including animals.
• Seek integrated advice: Because the law now requires consideration of family violence and animal welfare, getting coordinated legal advice that covers family law and family violence options will often produce better outcomes.

The 2025 amendments represent a meaningful step towards recognising the real place companion animals hold in family life.

They do not remove the property framework, but they ask courts to look beyond mere ownership. They need to consider care, welfare and the role of family violence when deciding who keeps a pet after separation.

For victim-survivors who rely on their pet for comfort or are subject to threats involving animals, the new provisions offer an additional legal lens that may influence outcomes in their favour.

For individual advice on these matters, please get in touch with our Aintree Group Legal team.

This is general advice only and has not been prepared with your situation and needs in mind. For individual and personalised advice, we highly recommend that you seek out proper professional advice from your lawyer.