header-logo header-logo

11 April 2025 / Shivi Rajput
Issue: 8112 / Categories: Features , Family , Divorce , Animal welfare
printer mail-detail

All bark, no bite?

215636
Is the UK playing catch-up in its lack of laws surrounding pet disputes? Shivi Rajput considers the current treatment of four-legged family members
  • The treatment of pets in divorce proceedings in England and Wales and internationally.
  • The recent case of FI v DO, in which the central dispute after family finances was the care of the family dog.
  • Ideas for reform to align the law with the emotional and practical importance of pets in families.

It is indisputable—Britain is a nation of dog lovers. With an estimated 33% of UK households owning a dog, they are the country’s most popular pet. Among millennials, the trend is even more pronounced, as many opt for ‘fur babies’ over traditional family structures.

Given the deep emotional bonds formed with pets, disputes over their ownership during divorce proceedings can be particularly contentious. However, despite their significance in family life, the law in England and Wales continues to classify pets as ‘chattels’—personal property akin to furniture or jewellery. This outdated framework

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll