Legal wrangles over pets: A spotlight on ownership disputes

While the sharp minds of the legal profession were mostly focused this year on paving the way for new laws and deciding on matters of national importance, legal wrangles concerning pets were yet again no stranger to the Bench.

Earlier this month, the fate of an African Grey parrot came under the judicial spotlight. The Mpumalanga High Court had to grapple with the question of whether the feathery subject before it was indeed Zazu, or whether it was Zippy.

Both birds escaped at a stage, one being captured again, while the other is still missing. The owners of both birds claimed the one captured was their beloved pet.

The contentious dispute involved Mfanawokulunga Orbet Ntuli and Crystle Pachos, both of whom vehemently claimed ownership of the captured bird. The case involved a series of legal proceedings, beginning at the small claims court, followed by a hearing in the magistrate's court and subsequently moving to the high court for an appeal.

Both parties reported the disappearance of their respective birds. Pachos’s Zazu went missing in February 2020. She launched a social media campaign to locate Zazu and in May 2021 when she was reunited with the bird, she celebrated the news on Facebook.

The matter landed before the Small Claims Court, which dismissed the case on the grounds that it was too complex for its jurisdiction. A behavioural assessment to ascertain its rightful owner proved the bird more partial to Pachos, but this was said not to be enough.

A magistrate subsequently and for legal reasons ruled in favour of Ntuli, ordering Pachos to surrender Zazu. Pachos appealed the matter and Deputy Judge President Judge Takalani Ratshibvumo, also for a variety of legal reasons, ordered in Pachos’s favour.

Another four-legged plight that reached the court this year was that of Triesie, the Yorkshire Terrier. Her owner claimed damages from a veterinary clinic in Pretoria, alleging that she suffered burns due to an overly hot warm water bottle. This was after Triesie underwent a cruciate ligament repair but was said to be badly burned on her other leg by the bottle.

Riaan Nortje turned to the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, where he demanded damages from the veterinary clinic. He sued the clinic for R400,000 for emotional distress. Deputy Judge President Aubrey Ledwaba granted the claim for emotional shock but ordered the veterinary clinic to pay the proven damages, which were to be determined later.

Well-known family lawyer Bertus Preller, meanwhile, said a tug-of-war over animals in divorce and related matters is no stranger to the law. The most typical situation involves dogs and cats, particularly where both parties have been primary caregivers.

High-value animals create even more conflict, Preller said. He has also dealt with matters involving thoroughbred horses where there is both emotional attachment and significant financial value at stake.

“These disputes become complicated when the animals are registered in one person's name, but the other spouse contributed financially to their upkeep, training, or competition costs".

According to Preller, for couples without children, pets may be the closest thing to shared "offspring," making the dispute even more emotionally charged. “I have also seen situations where fighting over the pet becomes a proxy battle for other unresolved anger or hurt in the divorce".

The emotional cost of a protracted legal battle over a pet often outweighs any benefit either party might gain from "winning,” Preller advised.