<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rex Judicata</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pinktape.co.uk/2008/03/13/rex-judicata/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/2008/03/13/rex-judicata/</link>
	<description>a blog from the family bar</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 12:28:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: familoo</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/2008/03/13/rex-judicata/#comment-2182</link>
		<dc:creator>familoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 20:52:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/?p=96#comment-2182</guid>
		<description>Well I&#039;m no property lawyer and no nothing of Australian law, but a tenancy as I understand is no more than a contract or licence, albeit often regulated by statute. It does not give an absolute right to property but a right to use or occupy it on terms which are agreed between the parties. I don&#039;t see a difference between a term not to cause damage to the property or a term not to have a dog in the property - its a matter for the parties to agree between themselves. if a landlord wants to protect against the risk of damage by pets he&#039;s entitled to do so, after all most insurance policies won&#039;t cover either landlord or tenant for pet damage (as I know to my cost!). So as a pet owner it&#039;s a pain, but I should think it&#039;s perfectly permissible in law. Pink handbags however may be the subject of criminal sanction...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well I&#8217;m no property lawyer and no nothing of Australian law, but a tenancy as I understand is no more than a contract or licence, albeit often regulated by statute. It does not give an absolute right to property but a right to use or occupy it on terms which are agreed between the parties. I don&#8217;t see a difference between a term not to cause damage to the property or a term not to have a dog in the property &#8211; its a matter for the parties to agree between themselves. if a landlord wants to protect against the risk of damage by pets he&#8217;s entitled to do so, after all most insurance policies won&#8217;t cover either landlord or tenant for pet damage (as I know to my cost!). So as a pet owner it&#8217;s a pain, but I should think it&#8217;s perfectly permissible in law. Pink handbags however may be the subject of criminal sanction&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barking Mad Equity for Pet Owners</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/2008/03/13/rex-judicata/#comment-2181</link>
		<dc:creator>Barking Mad Equity for Pet Owners</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 12:19:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/?p=96#comment-2181</guid>
		<description>We work for the rights of responsible pet owners to live a normal life in Australia.

In regards to renting, there are commonly used tenancy agreements that claim to be in accordance with tenancy law and regulation.  From my research, I can&#039;t ever see this premise being tested.

These default tenancy agreements state that an animal or bird can not be kept at the premises UNLESS PERMISSION IS OBTAINED  (this is the rented premises that the law gives the renter full right of access to providing they pay rent and behave).

Dogs are chattel - full stop.  Not only are they chattel, they are LEGAL chattel if registered per applicable law where you reside.

SO HOW CAN A RENTAL AGREEMENT MAKE YOU ASK PERMISSION TO HAVE A DOG - OR, THE LEGAL EQUIVALENT, A PINK HANDBAG AT YOUR HOME?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We work for the rights of responsible pet owners to live a normal life in Australia.</p>
<p>In regards to renting, there are commonly used tenancy agreements that claim to be in accordance with tenancy law and regulation.  From my research, I can&#8217;t ever see this premise being tested.</p>
<p>These default tenancy agreements state that an animal or bird can not be kept at the premises UNLESS PERMISSION IS OBTAINED  (this is the rented premises that the law gives the renter full right of access to providing they pay rent and behave).</p>
<p>Dogs are chattel &#8211; full stop.  Not only are they chattel, they are LEGAL chattel if registered per applicable law where you reside.</p>
<p>SO HOW CAN A RENTAL AGREEMENT MAKE YOU ASK PERMISSION TO HAVE A DOG &#8211; OR, THE LEGAL EQUIVALENT, A PINK HANDBAG AT YOUR HOME?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: familoo</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/2008/03/13/rex-judicata/#comment-1651</link>
		<dc:creator>familoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 07:44:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/?p=96#comment-1651</guid>
		<description>@Elizabeth.
Because of professional conduct rules I can&#039;t offer specific legal advice through this blog. In any event, I&#039;m not sure what more I could usefully say except to refer you to the blog post you have commented on, which probably answers most of the questions you have posed: in essence a dog is really no more than a piece of property as far as the law is concerned.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Elizabeth.<br />
Because of professional conduct rules I can&#8217;t offer specific legal advice through this blog. In any event, I&#8217;m not sure what more I could usefully say except to refer you to the blog post you have commented on, which probably answers most of the questions you have posed: in essence a dog is really no more than a piece of property as far as the law is concerned.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elizabeth</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/2008/03/13/rex-judicata/#comment-1648</link>
		<dc:creator>Elizabeth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 00:28:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/?p=96#comment-1648</guid>
		<description>Hi everyone, can I run this by you for some advice? If this is the wrong place to ask then please ignore my question. 

I broke my back in January 2007 and suffered with chronic pain, stress and depression for 8 months, was off work and generally unable to cope with life whilst waiting for treatment on the NHS. In August 2007 I asked my neighbour if I could start walking her dog. 

This dog (Ellie, a collie- lurcher, 6 months old) had recently been passed to my neighbour by her father who lived on a narrowboat and found the dog was growing too big. My neighbour, a single mum with a son of about 3 years rarely walked the dog and had it tied up in the back garden for most of the day.

Over the next 7 months I walked Ellie on a daily basis in all weathers, all through winter, taking her for long walks across fields where she got a real taste of freedom. We bonded emotionally and the physical exercise calmed Ellie down and gradually I began to recover and became pain free to an extent where I could return to work again. I built Ellie a super dog kennel, brought her fresh bones, washed and cleaned her if she got dirty on the fields.

My neighbour decided to get rid of Ellie at one point because of her difficult behaviour,  I was quite distraught 
to here this and decided to take her in myself. A couple of days later she asked for Ellie back and I foolishly agreed as the previous arrangement of walking Ellie was fine with me. We agreed that I could still take her for walks as it was good for my back, if I stopped the walking the pain quickly returned.

I taught Ellie many things, we went on trips out. None of this I did for money, but because it was good for me physically, mentally and good for Ellie too. She was my perfect companion dog and fitted into my outdoor lifestyle perfectly. In the last couple of months I even took her to dog training classes until my neighbour gradually stopped answering the door. She wrote me a letter explaining that Ellie thinks I&#039;m her owner, that she chews her toys up if she doesn&#039;t see me and that she wanted to do everything herself now. 

I haven&#039;t been able to walk Ellie for about 6 weeks now. It really breaks my heart to see her over the fence everyday and not be able to interact with her. 

I phoned the RSPCA to ask for some advice because I&#039;m worried about her not being exercised and they said to monitor the situation for a few weeks which I have done. She doesn&#039;t get a daily walk, stimulation, socialization, lessons or quality time like she used to with me, my neighbour doesn&#039;t understand this breed is athletic. She is tied up - or in the house.

Can I apply for custody on health grounds - for me and on welfare grounds for the dog? I have made a massive investment in Ellie as she became my motivation and has kept me well.  Since not walking her I have found it physically and emotionally more difficult to cope. I would just be happy to have access, but I believe the courts can&#039;t grant access to a dog. Can anyone help with advice? Do I have any hope?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi everyone, can I run this by you for some advice? If this is the wrong place to ask then please ignore my question. </p>
<p>I broke my back in January 2007 and suffered with chronic pain, stress and depression for 8 months, was off work and generally unable to cope with life whilst waiting for treatment on the NHS. In August 2007 I asked my neighbour if I could start walking her dog. </p>
<p>This dog (Ellie, a collie- lurcher, 6 months old) had recently been passed to my neighbour by her father who lived on a narrowboat and found the dog was growing too big. My neighbour, a single mum with a son of about 3 years rarely walked the dog and had it tied up in the back garden for most of the day.</p>
<p>Over the next 7 months I walked Ellie on a daily basis in all weathers, all through winter, taking her for long walks across fields where she got a real taste of freedom. We bonded emotionally and the physical exercise calmed Ellie down and gradually I began to recover and became pain free to an extent where I could return to work again. I built Ellie a super dog kennel, brought her fresh bones, washed and cleaned her if she got dirty on the fields.</p>
<p>My neighbour decided to get rid of Ellie at one point because of her difficult behaviour,  I was quite distraught<br />
to here this and decided to take her in myself. A couple of days later she asked for Ellie back and I foolishly agreed as the previous arrangement of walking Ellie was fine with me. We agreed that I could still take her for walks as it was good for my back, if I stopped the walking the pain quickly returned.</p>
<p>I taught Ellie many things, we went on trips out. None of this I did for money, but because it was good for me physically, mentally and good for Ellie too. She was my perfect companion dog and fitted into my outdoor lifestyle perfectly. In the last couple of months I even took her to dog training classes until my neighbour gradually stopped answering the door. She wrote me a letter explaining that Ellie thinks I&#8217;m her owner, that she chews her toys up if she doesn&#8217;t see me and that she wanted to do everything herself now. </p>
<p>I haven&#8217;t been able to walk Ellie for about 6 weeks now. It really breaks my heart to see her over the fence everyday and not be able to interact with her. </p>
<p>I phoned the RSPCA to ask for some advice because I&#8217;m worried about her not being exercised and they said to monitor the situation for a few weeks which I have done. She doesn&#8217;t get a daily walk, stimulation, socialization, lessons or quality time like she used to with me, my neighbour doesn&#8217;t understand this breed is athletic. She is tied up &#8211; or in the house.</p>
<p>Can I apply for custody on health grounds &#8211; for me and on welfare grounds for the dog? I have made a massive investment in Ellie as she became my motivation and has kept me well.  Since not walking her I have found it physically and emotionally more difficult to cope. I would just be happy to have access, but I believe the courts can&#8217;t grant access to a dog. Can anyone help with advice? Do I have any hope?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: familoo</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/2008/03/13/rex-judicata/#comment-1628</link>
		<dc:creator>familoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 19:35:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/?p=96#comment-1628</guid>
		<description>yes and breeders would have to obtain care orders before removing puppies from their birth parents and placing them with human adopters ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yes and breeders would have to obtain care orders before removing puppies from their birth parents and placing them with human adopters ;-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Cook</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/2008/03/13/rex-judicata/#comment-1627</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Cook</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:26:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/?p=96#comment-1627</guid>
		<description>Surely under the Animal Act 1989 the interests of the dog are paramount</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Surely under the Animal Act 1989 the interests of the dog are paramount</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lynne Bastow</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/2008/03/13/rex-judicata/#comment-1623</link>
		<dc:creator>Lynne Bastow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 11:30:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/?p=96#comment-1623</guid>
		<description>My aunt and uncle had a sign in their kitchen &quot; We only stay together because of the dog&quot;.  They meant it and the dog was very happy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My aunt and uncle had a sign in their kitchen &#8221; We only stay together because of the dog&#8221;.  They meant it and the dog was very happy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fiona</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/2008/03/13/rex-judicata/#comment-1619</link>
		<dc:creator>Fiona</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:44:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/?p=96#comment-1619</guid>
		<description>Purrrfect! Shouldn&#039;t the views of the animals be a consideration in deciding residency and contact though? We had two red setters, one each, and mine wouldn&#039;t go anywhere without me and my ex-husband&#039;s wouldn&#039;t go anywhere without the other so I was stuck with both dogs. Certainly grounds to argue for a larger share of assets IMHO.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Purrrfect! Shouldn&#8217;t the views of the animals be a consideration in deciding residency and contact though? We had two red setters, one each, and mine wouldn&#8217;t go anywhere without me and my ex-husband&#8217;s wouldn&#8217;t go anywhere without the other so I was stuck with both dogs. Certainly grounds to argue for a larger share of assets IMHO.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Bolch</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/2008/03/13/rex-judicata/#comment-1618</link>
		<dc:creator>John Bolch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:04:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/?p=96#comment-1618</guid>
		<description>Excellent. I&#039;ve been trying to summon the energy to do a post on dividing the pets on divorce, but you&#039;ve saved me the task (and done a far better job than I would have done). Love the post title too...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent. I&#8217;ve been trying to summon the energy to do a post on dividing the pets on divorce, but you&#8217;ve saved me the task (and done a far better job than I would have done). Love the post title too&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
