BC Court Requires Split Couple to Share Custody of Pet Following Family Law Update
A B.C. court has granted shared custody of a family dog after the couple broke up, following a new provincial law that treats pets as family members rather than property.
Stella, a golden retriever, will now split her time between Sahar Bayat and her ex-partner, Omid Mavedati, as determined by a B.C. Supreme Court judge who recognized both parties’ love and care for the animal.
“Both the claimant and the respondent have shown a deep concern about the well being of Stella, and I am satisfied that in the circumstances the custody of Stella should be shared on an interim without‑prejudice basis,” Associate Judge Scott Nielsen wrote in his decision. “I am going to make an order that the claimant and the respondent share the custody of Stella 50/50 on a week-on/week-off basis.”
Ms. Bayat had requested sole custody of Stella, alleging neglect by Mr. Mavedati.
The couple started living together in April 2020 and separated in February 2023, according to the court ruling.
Stella was purchased in August 2020, although Ms. Bayat’s name was not listed on the dog’s “birth certificate.”
Related Stories
“The claimant explains that she is not listed on Stella’s birth certificate because she was unaware that she could have been included, and the respondent informed her that only one name could be on the document,” Judge Nielsen explained.
As of January, amendments to Section 7 of the B.C. Family Law Act mandate Supreme Court judges to consider various factors when determining custody arrangements for a “companion animal.” These factors include the circumstances of the animal’s acquisition, caregiving responsibilities, instances of family violence or animal cruelty, a child’s connection to the pet, and the willingness of the parties to care for the animal.
“The recent changes to the Family Law Act redefine the ownership of a companion animal like Stella in a way that transcends mere possession of property. The amendments acknowledge the animal’s sentience through the outlined criteria,” Judge Nielsen commented.
“Both the claimant and the respondent lead busy professional lives. They both clearly adore Stella and have invested significant legal resources and court appearances to prioritize Stella’s best interests,” he added in the court ruling.
