Trustees of Catholic Aged Care Sydney v Murphy

Trustees of Catholic Aged Care Sydney commenced proceedings against Murphy, a resident of a retirement village, in the Federal Circuit Court. The Trustees sought an injunction to prevent Murphy from keeping a German Shepherd dog named Rex in his unit and on common areas of the village. This was in breach of Rule 5 of the village Rules, which prohibited pets, except for assistance animals. The Trustees argued that Rex did not qualify as an assistance animal. Murphy contended that Rex was an assistance animal, providing him with emotional support, and that he was entitled to keep him under the village Rules.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether Rex qualified as an “assistance animal” under Rule 5 of the village Rules. The Court needed to determine the meaning of “assistance animal” in the context of the village Rules and consider whether Rex met that definition. The Court also needed to decide whether Murphy’s claim that Rex provided him with emotional support was sufficient to classify Rex as an assistance animal.

The Court found that the term “assistance animal” in the village Rules referred to animals that assist a person with a disability, not animals that provide emotional support. The Court held that Murphy had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that Rex assisted him with a disability. Therefore, Rex did not qualify as an assistance animal under the village Rules. Consequently, Murphy was in breach of Rule 5 by keeping Rex in his unit and on common areas of the village. The Court granted the Trustees’ application for an injunction, ordering Murphy to remove Rex from his unit and ensure that the dog was not kept in his unit or brought onto common areas of the village.

The Court made an order that Murphy was to remove Rex from his unit and ensure that the dog was not kept in his unit or brought onto common areas of the village by 11 August 2017. The Court did not award any costs.