MY girlfriend and I split up after I interrupted her and our farrier in the hay barn.

We were approaching our fifth anniversary together. Anvils are remarkably light I discovered when you’re upset. She’s gone, but the problem is we have a horse together.

Major is a beautiful, well-bred 11-year-old Irish draught with the temperament of a saint. My ex and I were into ponies as kids and when Covid happened we decided to get back into it. Major is stabled behind my house which I shared with my ex before we split. This is a rural area and both of us enjoyed going for hacks after a tough day in the office.

We each paid half the purchase price and every bill for Major was split 50/50. My ex called yesterday to tell me she wants “her horse” back. She says that she has an attachment to Major that is akin to the relationship between a mother and child. I told her that the horse was too well-bred to have her for a mother.

She offered to buy me out and threatened that if I don’t hand over “her horse”, she is going to court to get custody of him? Is that a thing?

EVERYBODY in horses knows the frustration that interrupts the idyllic harmony of the equestrian life by the necessity of managing a relationship with one’s farrier - invariably necessary and invariably unavailable. However your farrier trouble is on a whole other level.

Your horse is a chattel purchased within a relationship but outside of marriage which means the usual rights that married persons might enjoy vis-a-vis marital property do not apply.

This is not the end of it, however, as living with a person for a long period of time in an intimate and committed relationship might mean you’re cohabitants pursuant to the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010.

I’m assuming you and your ex don’t have children together which means that you both fall outside the legislation which doesn’t kick in for a couple without children until five years of such living have passed. You got lucky by breaking up before the fifth anniversary and breathe a big sigh of relief because you are in a stronger position legally vis-à-vis your property than you would have been had you found her with the farrier after the fifth anniversary. There are always silver linings.

Access can arise, however, outside of the overarching family law regimes. The Guardianship of Infants Act 1964, as amended, sets out the legal regime governing custody and access to children. You will be glad to hear that the Act does not make provision for such reliefs with regard to animals.

Under Irish law, animals are property. Interestingly though, this is changing elsewhere and Spain amended its Civil Code in early 2022 to change the definition of animals from ‘objects’ to ‘sentient beings and family members’ and made provision for custody of an animal in the circumstances of a family breakdown.

Similar cases

Animals do feature in family law cases and in JC v JHC in 1982, the Irish High Court was asked to determine which spouse owned a pure-bred bull terrier in a divorce case. The wife claimed the husband gave her the dog as a gift. However, the kennel club papers recorded that ownership had been transferred from joint names to the husband alone and on that basis the Court determined that the husband got the dog. The determination was made on the basis of ownership.

The custody of a horse is not an uncommon feature of dispute in family law cases in England and Wales. In most cases, the dispute revolves around whether one party should continue to provide financial support to the other party and/or their children to include the costs of maintaining a horse or pony (See for example Wright v Wright 2015 EWCA Civ. 201). However, sometimes a judge will be called upon to decide who gets the horse.

In a Scottish case, EP v G in 2016, Lady Woulfe accepted the evidence of an expert witness that the wife “found her horses to be a great solace to her and beneficial to her emotional and mental health”. The judge ordered the husband to pay ongoing financial support to his ex-wife to include support for the maintenance of her three horses, two of whom were lame. She was spending nearly £2,400 a month on their care!

You fall outside any overarching ‘family law regime’, so ownership of your horse, if disputed, will be determined in a court according to the ordinary rules of civil law.

Personal property

Your horse is personal property (personalty – as opposed to estates in land called realty). Though you are in possession of the horse ownership appears to be joint. Just as two or more people can own land together, two or more people can own personalty together and that can be as tenants in common or as joint tenants.

Your ex is no longer in physical control of the horse but this does not mean that she has lost legal possession and an action is always available to an owner to seek recovery of their property if wrongly interfered with. Such an action, however, will not lie against a co-owner who obviously is entitled to possession as co-owner.

If your ex claims to be the sole owner, she will seek conversion. If the Court accepts this, the Court has the power to order you to return the horse.

If however the court accepts, as I think it might, that you are co-owners the position of a co-owner whose assets have been converted by another and/or who is out of possession is problematic as there is no remedy in conversion or detinue against a co-owner though there may be an action for injury for reversionary interest which would amount to an award of damages but not necessarily what your ex wants most – the horse.

Possession is nine-10ths of the law and you have the upper hand. However this is a complex area of law and nothing is certain. In my view, your ex will get some manner of satisfaction from a Court, even if it’s only damages. In the end you will have to settle the case either by buying out her interest or selling her your interest.

My advice would be to sell your interest in Major to your ex for as much as you can get from her. Use that money to buy another horse (maybe two). Take up hunting – an activity well justified on account of the extra time and money available to you. Who knows who you might meet on the hunting field and it might be the start of a great love story.

The above comments are made only by way of academic commentary to assist The Irish Field readers better understand the legal norms and rules applicable to common equine related dilemmas. These comments are not ‘legal advice’ as per section 2 of Legal Services Regulation Act 2015 nor is the author providing ‘legal services’ pursuant to the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015. Always consult a solicitor.

Seán D. Rafter is a Kilkenny-based barrister. He practices in criminal and civil law with a special interest in equine and agri issues. He is an enthusiast of hunting, racing and a good book.

HAVE A LEGAL QUERY FOR SEÁN? Email editorial@

theirishfield.ie and put ‘Legal’ in the subject heading.