- Thread Author
- #1
An Alberta judge has decided to divide four cats between a former couple who were fighting over who should keep them, saying neither of them can take them all.
Douglas Mah, the judge who made the decision, explained that animals are not legally considered children and should not be dealt with on a child custody basis. He stressed that child custody and animal ownership are two different things.
The case involved Kishan Singh and Reba Smith, who were together for about six years before separating in March 2023. After a heated argument, Reba left home and when she returned the next day, the cats were gone, with Singh taking them with her.
Reba filed a lawsuit and returned the cats, but Singh responded by filing a counterclaim. This led to a lower court case in November 2024, in which each of them was awarded two cats.
Singh was dissatisfied with the decision and appealed. Each party argued that they were the only ones who deserved to keep all four animals.
In her decision, Justice Mah said the concept of “the best interests of the cat” may be considered elsewhere, but Alberta has no legal basis for using that criterion. She added that animals are legally property, and the purpose of their ownership is companionship and family relationships.
However, she stressed that society does not condone cruelty to animals. The ability of a person to demonstrate that they can properly care for them is the standard for dividing ownership after a separation.
Douglas Mah, the judge who made the decision, explained that animals are not legally considered children and should not be dealt with on a child custody basis. He stressed that child custody and animal ownership are two different things.
The case involved Kishan Singh and Reba Smith, who were together for about six years before separating in March 2023. After a heated argument, Reba left home and when she returned the next day, the cats were gone, with Singh taking them with her.
Reba filed a lawsuit and returned the cats, but Singh responded by filing a counterclaim. This led to a lower court case in November 2024, in which each of them was awarded two cats.
Singh was dissatisfied with the decision and appealed. Each party argued that they were the only ones who deserved to keep all four animals.
In her decision, Justice Mah said the concept of “the best interests of the cat” may be considered elsewhere, but Alberta has no legal basis for using that criterion. She added that animals are legally property, and the purpose of their ownership is companionship and family relationships.
However, she stressed that society does not condone cruelty to animals. The ability of a person to demonstrate that they can properly care for them is the standard for dividing ownership after a separation.
. They. can buy cats in pet shops or find them in the streets wandering looking for love 
.
