Have you heard about the bird that ended up in the High Court? In 2023, a couple in Mpumalanga went to war over an African Grey parrot named Zazu. The matter started in the Small Claims Court, which threw it out for being too complicated for that forum. It moved to a magistrate’s court, which ruled one way. It was then appealed in 2025, and the Deputy Judge President of the Mpumalanga High Court ruled the other way. Two courts, two outcomes, one very confused parrot.
It’s a good story. It’s also a useful illustration of something most divorcing couples don’t find out until it’s too late: South African law has no dedicated framework for who keeps the family pet. Judges are applying ordinary property law to a dispute that feels, to the people living it, nothing like a fight over a couch.
Property, Not Dependents
Under South African law, animals are corporeal movable property. That means that in divorce, they are not treated like children, and there is no “best interests of the pet” standard. Instead, courts apply ordinary ownership principles within the framework of the Divorce Act 70 of 1979 and the Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984.
In practical terms:
- If the marriage is in community of property, the pet is usually part of the joint estate. But in divorce, the court still resolves who gets the animal by applying ownership principles (who bought it, in whose name it’s registered, etc.), often giving it to one party and adjusting the overall division of assets accordingly.
- If the marriage is out of community of property, the pet typically belongs to whoever bought it, registered it, or can otherwise show they own it. A vet’s invoice, a microchip registration, or a breeder’s contract can end up mattering more than who walks the dog every morning.
- Emotional bond, time spent, or who’s more attached are not legal factors a court is required to weigh, in the way they would be for a child.
Why “Pet Custody” Isn’t a Real Legal Term Here
Some jurisdictions overseas, parts of the US and Europe among them, have moved toward treating companion animals differently in family law, with some courts or legislatures recognising arrangements closer to shared custody. South Africa hasn’t gone there. There’s no local legislation creating a “best interests of the pet” standard, and no formal statutory mechanism for shared custody, alternating weekends, or court-ordered visitation.
That doesn’t mean nothing can be done. It means it has to be done by agreement, not by relying on a court to order it for you.
What Actually Works: Put it in the Settlement Agreement
Divorcing couples can, and often do, include pets in their settlement agreement, thus the same document that divides furniture, vehicles, and bank accounts. A settlement agreement can record who keeps the pet, how vet bills get split, and even informal contact arrangements, and once it’s made an order of court, it becomes enforceable in the same way any other term of the agreement is.
Where couples can’t agree, options are limited and unglamorous:
- Negotiate it like any other asset, ideally with the help of your attorney or a mediator, before the matter goes anywhere near a courtroom.
- In genuinely disputed cases where welfare is in question, the SPCA may investigate and, if necessary, seek court intervention on animal-welfare grounds. This is not a formal custody-assessment process and does not replace the court’s ownership analysis.
- Litigate it as an ownership dispute, as the Zazu case shows, which means proving who legally owns the animal, not who loves it more.
The Practical Takeaway
If you have pets and you’re getting married, or you’re already married and it’s on your mind, the unglamorous but effective move is to deal with it before there’s a dispute:
- Keep records of who paid for the pet, who it’s registered or microchipped to, and any vet accounts in your name.
- If you want a shared care arrangement to survive a divorce, put it in writing in your antenuptial contract or, later, in your settlement agreement. Don’t assume a court will order one for you.
- Talk to a family law attorney before the relationship reaches crisis point. Once a dispute is live, your leverage is whatever you can prove you own, not how attached you are.
The law hasn’t caught up with how most South Africans actually feel about their pets. Until it does, the couples who avoid a Zazu-style saga are the ones who put something in writing while they were still on speaking terms.
While every reasonable effort is taken to ensure the accuracy and soundness of the contents of this publication, neither the writers of articles nor the publisher will bear any responsibility for the consequences of any actions based on information or recommendations contained herein. Our material is for informational purposes.