Deborah Rook’s research while affiliated with Northumbria University and other places

The covid-19 pandemic, and in particular, the rise in pet ownership, the greater focus on home-life during lockdowns and the normalisation of hybrid-working conditions post-pandemic, has shed light on an under-researched area of law that affects millions of people across the world: the use of ‘no pet’ covenants in private rental housing. This article identifies the prevalence of ‘no pet’ covenants as a socio-legal problem that is of global significance. It assesses the legal regulation of pets in private rental housing through a Harm Assessment approach that has global application. A Harm Assessment approach balances harms to various stakeholders in both the use and restriction of ‘no pet’ covenants. In countries that have no legal regulation of pets in housing it can be used to assess the need for legislation. This approach considers the character, magnitude and likelihood of the harm, something which has had little consideration to date. Drawing, by analogy, on the work of Feinberg and his analysis of harm within the context of the legitimacy of state interference with individual liberty, this article adapts his theory of harm to assess the need for legal regulation of pets in rental housing. The legitimacy of a Harm Assessment approach is supported by the existing literature on ‘no pet’ covenants, from which the dominant theme of harm emerges. Identifying and weighting the types of harm to be balanced varies depending on cultural, religious and geographic considerations and further research is needed to better understand the harms in different countries.

Citation: Howell, T.J.; Nieforth, L.; Thomas-Pino, C.; Samet, L.; Agbonika, S.; Cuevas-Pavincich, F.; Fry, N.E.; Hill, K.; Jegatheesan, B.; Kakinuma, M.; et al. Defining Terms

Wildlife trade—both legal and illegal—is an activity that is currently the focus of global attention. Concerns over the loss of biodiversity, partly stemming from overexploitation, and the corona virus pandemic, likely originating from wildlife trade, are urgent matters. These concerns though centre on people. Only sometimes does the discussion focus on the wildlife traded and their welfare. In this article, we make the case as to why welfare is an important component of any discussion or policy about wildlife trade, not only for the interests of the wildlife, but also for the sake of humans. We detail the harm in the trade as well as the current welfare provisions, particularly in relation to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which guide global transport and trade. There are a number of ways that the current approach to wildlife welfare could be improved, and we propose ways forward in this regard.

This paper identifies the law’s failure to recognise and protect the human–companion animal relationship in the housing arena. The nature of the human–companion animal relationship has striking similarities to human–human relationships in the socially supportive aspects of the relationship such as attachment, nurturance and reliable alliance. This contributes to the social life and sense of well-being of the owner. There is also evidence that the human–companion animal relationship can have physical health benefits such as lowering the risk of death by cardiovascular disease. It is clear that society benefits from the human–companion animal relationship, which many owners perceive as akin to family, in the form of healthier, less isolated people with better social networks. Yet in the key area of housing, the law does nothing to protect or even recognise this relationship. In consequence, every year thousands of tenants in both the public and private sector are faced with ‘no pet’ covenants in their leases and grapple with difficulties such as reduced housing options, higher rents or the traumatic decision to give up their companion animal for rehoming or euthanasia. This is especially prevalent amongst vulnerable people, like the elderly and mentally ill, who are more likely to need to move into supported accommodation. This article examines housing law in countries, such as France and Canada, that prohibit ‘no pet’ covenants in residential leases and provides arguments for the effective formulation and implementation of such law in the UK.