divorce
Can a separation agreement finalized in a California court be overturned by a Canadian (BC) Court?
<p>1) A separation agreement was made between M &amp; F (both Canadian) but living in California.</p>

<p>2) The agreement states that F entirely owns n Properties in Canada.</p>

<p>3) M moves back to Canada, and over 10 years later wants to challenge the separation agreement.</p>

<p>4) The case is circulating the courts now, and M is claiming the separation agreement is one-sided and unfair. M wants some of the properties and has placed a CPL(lein) on F's properties in the meantime.</p>

<p>5) F is forced to constantly travel between Canada &amp; California to deal with this.</p>

<p>How is it possible that the Canadian courts are even considering this? Do they have jurisdiction to over-turn a separation agreement made in California?</p>

<p>M believes that F <em>gave</em> the BC Supreme court jurisdiction by replying to M's motion with a counterclaim. Is this a true, does it really work that way?</p>

<p>Thank you. Please let me know if you require any clarification.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>How is it possible that the Canadian courts are even considering this? </p>
</blockquote>

<p>Because they were asked to.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Do they have jurisdiction ...</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Maybe. One of the powers a court has is to decide if they have jurisdiction. The case involves Canadians and Canadian real estate - they need to at least consider if they have jurisdiction. They can decide wrongly but that’s what appeals are for.</p>

<p>F should be providing them with evidence that they don’t have jurisdiction on the basis of <a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Res_judicata" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Res Judicata </a> but they will ultimately make up their own mind.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>to over-turn a separation agreement made in California?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Of course not - Canadian courts cannot tell a Californian courts what to do.</p>

<p>And vice-versa. Which means they certainly have the power to refuse to enforce its effects in Canada. If F wants to rely on the Californian judgement in Canada then the Canadian court has to allow this.</p>
