We have separated, who gets to keep the pet?

With an increasing preference among Gen Z couples for owning pets (aka “fur babies”) as opposed to raising children, it poses the question as to who retains a pet in the event of separation. Despite the emotional connection one shares with their beloved pet and their integral part in the family, animals are in fact treated as property in family proceedings.
People are encouraged to reach an arrangement or agreement between themselves before seeking the intervention of the Court. If an agreement cannot be reached, you will be required to commence proceedings in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (“FCFCOA”) for property settlement Orders including seeking to retain Fido. Otherwise, if an agreement has been reached to retain Fido, you may be required to pay your former spouse out for their contribution to the purchase.
In accordance with s 78 of the Family Law Act 1975, the Court may declare the title or rights, if any, that a party has in respect to the pet. The Court takes into account the following considerations when determining who has an entitlement to Fido:

1. Whose name is the family pet registered under;
2. Whose is the name registered on the microchip records for the animal;
3. Who was responsible for the day to day and or medical costs of the animal;
4. Who was the main caregiver of the family pet – who walked, fed, bathed and took the animal to the vet;
5. The financial capacity of each party to support the family pet;
6. The impact on the child if they are separated from the pet;
7. The work and social commitments of each party; and
8. The home environment proposed for a domestic pet and whether it is pet friendly.

Seeking legal advice in the event of property settlement is important, especially when it regards something as emotionally valuable as a pet. If you and your ex-partner are not able to come to an agreement over Fido’s living arrangements, we recommend speaking to our family law team to discuss your options.

If there is any doubt as to the parentage of a child, a DNA test can be requested and Court ordered to establish whether in fact you are the biological parent of the child. Section 69W(b) of the Family Law Act 1975 (“the Act”) bestows this power.
As is set out in sections 69P and 69Q of the Act, the presumption adopted by the Court is that if you were in a relationship with the other person at the time of conception, then the child is a product of the relationship. To refute or displace the presumption, the Court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for seeking a paternity test such as the disclosure of infidelity. The Applicant bears the onus of displacing the presumption.
In assessing parentage of a child, the Court will also take into consideration:

1. Who is listed on the child’s birth certificate (Section 69R of the Act);
2. Who is listed on the signed acknowledgment (Section 69T of Act) and
3. A Court has made a finding that a person is a parent of a particular child or is not a child of a particular child (section 69S of the Act)

If you are not the biological parent of the child, you will not be obligated to pay child support however this does not negate your standing to apply to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (“FCFCOA”) for parenting Orders on the basis that you may be a person with an interest in the child’s care, development and welfare.
Despite FCFCOA Orders being legally binding and enforceable, and thus they should be complied with, the FCFCOA cannot force a person to undergo the testing as outlined in section 69Y and 69Z of the Act.
If a party does not comply with an Order of the FCFCOA to provide samples for DNA testing, the Court may make an inference as to that non-compliance and make a decision, based on the balance of probabilities, and the information before it.