"I demand that the court award custody of Beibei to me!" These words were spoken by the wife, Ms. Wang, and the Beibei she referred to was not a child, but a corgi!
In 2018, Wang and Xu got married. The two were busy with their careers after marriage and did not have children.
Because they love pets so much, the couple bought a corgi in 2020.
Last year, due to family matters, their relationship changed, and they started talking about divorce.
They quickly reached an agreement on the house and car registered under their names. However, they both wanted custody of their three-year-old corgi puppy. Unable to reach an agreement, they had no choice but to take the matter to court and request a ruling.
The wife, Ms. Wang, argued: "I bought Beibei with my own money, and I've always taken care of her daily needs, including eating, drinking, and toileting. I've developed a deep bond with her. My husband, Mr. Xu, plays video games after get off work and has no time to take care of her. Therefore, Beibei should be awarded to me."
The husband, Xu, refuted this, saying, "Although I did take care of Beibei less, I was the one who usually took Beibei out for walks. I already consider Beibei family, and I can't live without him."
The two men were locked in a bitter legal battle in court.
So, how will the court handle this special "custody" dispute?
The court held that since the couple had no children, the corgi was like a child to them, and therefore the case could be handled by referring to the principles of child custody.
Therefore, the court mediated between the two parties.
Considering that the Corgi was purchased by the wife, Ms. Wang, and that Ms. Wang usually takes care of it more, "custody" should belong to Ms. Wang. Mr. Xu should pay Ms. Wang "child support" for the Corgi every month until the Corgi passes away.
Mr. Xu has the right to visit the Corgi and take it for a walk every week, provided that he makes an appointment in advance.
Under the judge's mediation, both parties reached the aforementioned settlement agreement, and Beibei's custody was finally settled.
Xiaozhi's Commentary: my country's Civil Code stipulates that "pets purchased or kept by both spouses during the marriage should be classified as 'other property that should be jointly owned.'"
However, for this young couple, Beibei was not only property, but more importantly, an emotional anchor. Therefore, the court did not adopt a rigid judgment, but instead used a more flexible mediation approach to facilitate negotiations between the two parties, reaching a reasonable allocation of Beibei's custody and visitation rights, thus achieving a better judicial outcome.
