Pets can be an extremely important part of tenants’ lives. Previously, it has been hard for tenants to find rental properties where they were allowed to have their pets. This has at times led to homelessness or people accepting substandard housing that allowed them to have pets.
In recognition of this, new rules to make it easier for tenants to have pets came into effect on 1 December 2025 (s 18AA, ss 42C to 42G, s 49B(1)(c) RTA).
The new rules apply to all tenancy agreements no matter when they were signed. The only exception is that the rules are slightly different if the tenant already had a pet, with actual or implied permission, when the new rules came into effect.
If the tenant already had a pet before the new rules
If a tenant had a lawful pet before the pet rules came into effect, then they don’t need to ask their landlord for permission again. The landlord cannot ask the tenant for a pet bond or introduce new conditions for the existing pet(s).
This applies only if:
- the landlord gave permission for the pet or
- the tenancy agreement allowed pets or
- the tenancy agreement did not prohibit pets.
The tenant is fully liable for the costs of any pet-related damage that occurs on or after 1 December 2025. However, different rules apply if the tenant can prove that the damage occurred before 1 December 2025.
Find out more about liability for pet-related damage
If a tenant wants to get a different or additional pet, the new rules relating to consent and pet bonds apply.
Tenants can keep a pet with permission
A tenant can keep a pet at their rental home if the tenancy agreement permits it or the landlord gives them written consent (s 42C(1) RTA ). The tenant must comply with all reasonable conditions set by the landlord, including paying a pet bond if requested (see What are reasonable conditions below).
As of 1 December 2025, if a tenant asks to keep a pet, the landlord is required to agree unless there are reasonable grounds to say no (s 42E(4) RTA). (See What are reasonable grounds for refusal below).
If the landlord refuses to give the tenant permission to keep a pet without reasonable grounds, or sets unreasonable conditions, the tenant can take the landlord to the Tenancy Tribunal to seek resolution.
Overview of the disputes process and the Tenancy Tribunal
Tenants must get consent from their landlord for any type of pet, including small animals and fish, because there is a risk of damage with any type of pet. (See also What is defined as a pet below).
Tenants must pay for all pet-related damage, excluding fair wear and tear. This includes any damages associated with keeping the pet and not just damage caused directly by the pet.
Find out more about liability for pet-related damage
Talk to the landlord first
Before asking for consent, the tenant should consider whether the rental property is suitable for the pet, and what they can do to make sure the pet is secure and doesn’t cause damage or disruption to others. They can then discuss this with the landlord to reach agreement about what conditions will be set.
If a tenant already has a pet when applying for a new tenancy, it may be useful for the tenant to provide references from a previous landlord regarding the pet’s behaviour.
What is defined as a pet?
The Residential Tenancies Act (RTA) does not define what a pet is, but it is generally accepted to be an animal that is domesticated and kept for companionship or leisure.
Tenancy Services provides more guidance on determining whether an animal is a pet.
If the landlord and tenant agree that an animal is not a pet, then the pet rules described in this page do not apply. It is then up to the landlord whether they allow the animal to be kept at the rental property or not.
Disability assistance dogs must be permitted
Under the Human Rights Act, tenants who rely on a disability assistance dog must be able to have their animal with them in their rental property.
Prohibiting a tenant from keeping a disability assistance dog is a form of discrimination. The Human Rights Act 1993 states that people cannot be discriminated against on the grounds of disability (s 21(1)(h) Human Rights Act 1993).
For more information, see the rules around discrimination against people on the grounds of disability.
This exception applies only to dogs with certified disability assistance status and not to support or therapy animals.
Find out more about certification of disability assistance dogs
For tenants with support or therapy animals, medical documentation certifying that they need their animal does not have legal status. However, it may still be useful for a tenant to have this documentation if they are negotiating with their landlord about keeping their animal at the rental property. These rules may change in the future if support or therapy animals gain legal status.
Tenancy agreements cannot ban pets without reasonable grounds
Tenancy agreements are not allowed to ban keeping pets unless the landlord provides reasonable grounds for the ban and states them in the tenancy agreement (s 42D RTA). See examples of reasonable grounds below.
The tenancy agreement also must not set unreasonable conditions for keeping a pet.
If the tenancy agreement includes a pet ban without providing reasonable grounds or puts unreasonable conditions on being able to keep a pet, these are of no effect and cannot be enforced by the landlord (s 42D(4) RTA). The tenant can take the landlord to the Tenancy Tribunal to seek a remedy.
Overview of the disputes process and the Tenancy Tribunal
If a tenant lives in an apartment, unit title or cross lease property, a pet will only be allowed if this is permitted under the body corporate rules or cross-lease conditions. Pets may also be banned by local by-laws.
These rules form part of the tenancy agreement and are beyond the control of the landlord.
What are reasonable grounds for refusal?
It is unlawful for the landlord to refuse a tenant’s request to keep a pet or include a ban on pets in the tenancy agreement without reasonable grounds to do so (s 42D RTA, s 42E(4) RTA).
Examples of reasonable grounds include:
- the premises are not suitable for all or certain types of pets. For example, because the property is too small, lacks outdoor space or is unfenced
- body corporate rules or other rules or bylaws prohibit pets from being kept on the premises (s 42F RTA).
The landlord may also refuse consent for a particular pet or pets. For instance, if:
- there are more pets than is suitable for the premises
- the size, species or breed of pet(s) is not suitable for the premises
- the pet has a propensity for causing damage to premises or disruption to others in the neighbourhood
- a dog has been classified as dangerous or menacing under the Dog Control Act 1996
- there is good reason to believe that the pet has previously attacked a person or other animals (s 42F RTA).
Tenants may need to prove that they are responsible pet owners. The landlord can refuse permission to keep a pet if the tenant:
- has not complied with local bylaws relating to the pet. For example, dog registration or microchipping
- refuses to agree to reasonable conditions or
- has previously broken rules about pets set by the landlord (s 42F RTA).
Where the landlord has reasonable grounds for banning pets, these must be stated in the tenancy agreement.
If the landlord has grounds for refusing a specific request from a tenant to keep a pet, these must be stated in the landlord’s written response to the tenant’s request to keep a pet.
What are reasonable conditions?
When the landlord gives permission for a tenant to have a pet, they can set reasonable conditions that the tenant must follow (s 42G RTA). The landlord cannot set any conditions that interfere with the tenant’s rights under the Residential Tenancies Act (RTA), for instance their right to quiet enjoyment of their property (s 11(1) RTA).
Examples of the types of conditions that a landlord could reasonably set include:
- the tenant must pay a pet bond up to the equivalent of two weeks’ rent
- the pet(s) must be restrained when the landlord lawfully enters the premises
- the carpets must be cleaned to a professional standard at the end of the tenancy if the pet is kept inside
- the pet must not disrupt other tenants’ or neighbours’ peace
- the pet must be registered and/or microchipped if required by relevant bylaws.
Find out more about pet bonds
If these conditions are not met by the tenant, the landlord can give them a 14-day notice to remedy. If the problem is not resolved, the landlord can take the tenant to the Tenancy Tribunal.
Overview of the disputes process and the Tenancy Tribunal
The landlord cannot set new conditions or rules for people who already had pets (with permission) when the new rules came into effect.
Consent must be in writing
The landlord must provide a response to a tenant’s request to keep a pet in writing and respond within 21 days (s 42E RTA).
The response must include:
- whether consent is given or refused and
- if consent is given, any reasonable conditions attached to the consent or
- if consent is refused, the grounds for refusal.
The landlord can specify if the consent applies to pets in general, to a specific pet, a specified number of pets, or a specified type or breed of pet.
The landlord can also specify any reasonable conditions they have in terms of the characteristics of the pet or pets they are willing to consent to (for example, relating to size or breed).
Tenancy may be terminated if tenancy agreement breached
When the landlord gives consent for a pet, sets conditions, or prohibits or limits the type of pet that the tenant can have, these conditions form part of the tenancy agreement. If the tenant breaches their tenancy agreement, the landlord can issue them with a 14-day notice to remedy.
If the tenant does not comply with the 14-day notice, or is unable to reach a solution with the landlord, the landlord may apply to the Tenancy Tribunal for a remedy. The Tribunal will consider if the tenancy agreement has been breached and whether there are grounds to end the tenancy.
Breaches could include:
- the tenant getting a pet when they don’t have permission from their landlord or their tenancy agreement prohibits it
- the tenant not following the conditions set by the landlord about the type, size, breed or number of pets allowed, or any other reasonable conditions
- the pet causing significant damage
- the pet causing disruption to other tenants or neighbours
- the behaviour of the pet, or the tenant’s behaviour in relation to the pet, breaching the tenant’s responsibilities under the RTA (ss 40(1)- 40(2) RTA). For instance, in relation to keeping the premises reasonably clean and tidy or allowing the landlord access to the property when appropriate.
For the Tribunal to decide that the tenancy should be terminated they must be satisfied that “the breach is of such a nature or of such an extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy” (s 56(1)(c) RTA). Essentially this means that the breach is so severe or has such an impact that it would be unfair to the landlord to not end the tenancy.
The Tribunal may also offer other solutions rather than the termination of the tenancy. For instance, that the tenancy can continue if the pet is removed or that the pet is allowed but must be kept outside.
Tenancy Tribunal findings
The following Tenancy Tribunal case pre-dates the new rules about pets but it is still a useful example of the sorts of factors that are considered in cases about pets.
Case Study – Tenancy ended by Tribunal after breach of condition banning dogs
A tenancy was ended by the Tenancy Tribunal when it was established that the tenant had breached their tenancy agreement conditions by having dogs on the property. The tenancy agreement allowed one cat only.
It was noted that the property was unsuitable for dogs because it was multi-unit and unfenced. The dogs had roamed and caused distress to other tenants and occupants. This had required the body corporate and council dog control services to become involved.
The landlord served two 14-day notices on the tenant to remedy the breach of the tenancy agreement, but the tenant continued to have dogs on the property. The tenant claimed the dogs were her partner’s and did not live on the premises.
The Tenancy Tribunal concluded that it was in both parties’ interests to end the tenancy.
Last reviewed on 02 Dec 2025
Did you find this information helpful?
