Welcome changes to family law come into effect this week to better support victims of domestic violence in property settlements.
Author
- Meri Oakwood
Lecturer in Law, Southern Cross University
Importantly, the Family Law Amendment Bill 2024 will provide a new framework for determining ownership of the family pet in divorce and separation proceedings. Pets will no longer be recognised merely as property, but as " companion animals ".
Family law courts must now consider animal abuse, including threats to harm pets, when deciding which partner is awarded ownership.
Research suggests up to 15% of all animal cruelty cases involve domestic violence offending. Therefore, the new laws will provide some relief to partners whose beloved pets have suffered abuse.
Part of the family
Australia has high pet ownership , with 69% of households owning an animal companion. Some 48% have dogs and 33% have cats.
For victims of violence, the bond with their pet is very important for emotional support. Because of this attachment, abusers often target animals as one of the ways to control their victims.
Disturbing research has found animals living in violent households may be kicked, punched, held by their ears, thrown and poisoned. Injuries are common. Pets can be killed.
When a person experiences family violence in their home, they are often asked "Why don't you just leave?" The reasons are complicated . Perpetrators of coercive control can make their victims fearful for their own safety and their children's - and for the safety and wellbeing of their pets.
If victims do leave an abusive relationship, family pets are often left behind because it is too hard to find suitable accommodation. Also, the pet may be registered in the name of the abuser.
Court's past view of pets
Previously, if a victim asked for ownership of their pet, courts could not consider the animal's safety or wellbeing.
In Australian family law, pets were viewed as personal property , similar to other possessions such as cars, furniture and electronic equipment.
In any dispute about pets, courts would consider the following:
- who paid for it?
- was it a gift?
- whose name is on the ownership documents?
- who has possession?
- who paid the expenses?
In deciding custody, courts were not thinking about where the pet would be out of harm's way. Instead the focus was on who had the superior right to title , a common question in personal property law.
The safety and survival of a dog or cat was irrelevant in decision-making.
Hope on the horizon
Many Australians do not view pets as just another item of personal property. They see them as treasured family members who should be protected.
The amended Family Law Act redefines pets as companion animals, rather than as mere property. The shift recognises the deep emotional attachments between pets and their owners.
Any species of animal owned by a couple as a companion will be covered under the new sections of the Act. However, disputes in family law are more commonly about dogs.
When a marriage or de facto relationship breaks down, the court will consider any past cruelty towards a pet when deciding future ownership.
Matters for consideration will include:
- was there family violence?
- was there animal abuse, actual or threatened?
- who has ownership or possession of the animal?
- is there any attachment by an adult or child to the animal?
- how much did each person in the household care for the animal?
Courts will only be able to assign ownership to one party. There will be no joint custody to prevent ongoing disputes over the ownership of the pet.
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.
The sentience of animals - their ability to feel pain and fear - is still not recognised in Australian family law.
Nevertheless, this week's changes should lead to large numbers of companion animals gaining protection from future abuse.
Financial abuse may constitute family violence
Other changes to family law also come in to force this week.
Family law courts must consider the economic effects of family violence on the victim when making decisions about property and finances after separation.
Critically, the definition of family violence is being broadened. It will now include economic or financial abuse-related conduct, such as sabotaging the victim's employment, forcibly controlling their money or forcing them to go into debt.
Not paying child support for a long time might also count. Intentionally damaging a property to reduce its value will also be in the equation.
There will also be greater protections to prevent the misuse of sensitive information that arise from confidential conversations with healthcare professionals, or with specialist support services.
The property changes will apply to all new and existing proceedings, except where a final hearing has already commenced.
These reforms to better protect victim-survivors of family violence and the animals they love, are long overdue.
Meri Oakwood does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
