They are also seeking damages relating to the alleged breach of a contract of bailment – an agreement under which goods are transferred into the possession,but not ownership,of a third party for a period of time – relating to Oscar's upkeep and care.
Mr Gillespie wants Oscar returned to him,and seeks damages for the Cavoodle's"detention".
Judge Gibson said she was also informed in court that Mr Gillespie was seeking control of Oscar's Instagram account"which may or may not still be online,but which could still be an item of some value,due to Oscar’s social media success".
Judge Gibson said it was not clear the court had jurisdiction to hear the case because Oscar's value (in monetary terms) and the cost of his upkeep may have exceeded a $20,000 limit.
While neither party had asked for the case to be transferred to the NSW Supreme Court,the jurisdictional issue meant"this Court’s hands are effectively tied",Judge Gibson said.
"It may seem a very minor matter for the Supreme Court to be troubled by a dispute about a dog,even a celebrity dog with its own Instagram account,but there would appear to be no alternative."
The case was transferred to the Supreme Court,but may eventually return by agreement to the District Court.
Two related defamation proceedings have also been filed in the District Court,but will not proceed until the main dispute is resolved. The case is listed for a preliminary hearing in the Supreme Court on September 15.
Get our Morning&Evening Edition newsletters