In the recent family law case of Vyazemskaya v. Safin (2024 ONCA 156), the Ontario Court of Appeal affirmed a prior judgment from a lower court, which declined to acknowledge the validity of a divorce granted in Russia. This pivotal ruling not only underscores the challenge posed by “unfair forum-shopping tactics” but also sheds light on their implications for spousal support entitlements within Ontario’s legal landscape.
This decision serves as a poignant reminder of the complexities inherent in international divorces and the potential for conflicts when individuals seek advantageous legal jurisdictions to manipulate proceedings.
The individuals involved in the case were Russian citizens who had migrated to Canada. Following unsuccessful negotiations for a separation agreement, the husband left the matrimonial home and promptly filed for divorce in Russia just three days later.
Although the Russian court finalized the divorce in January 2020, under Russian law, the wife was not entitled to spousal support, in stark contrast to Ontario law’s expectations. Consequently, the wife contested the recognition of the Russian divorce in Ontario, citing the husband’s attempts to evade Canadian spousal support obligations as grounds for refusal.
The trial judge determined that the public policy exception was relevant due to the husband’s unfair “forum shopping.” She concluded that the primary motivation for seeking a divorce in Russia was to evade spousal support obligations mandated by Ontario law. She stated that this case exemplifies the “moral” and “fundamental” principles underlying the public policy defense.
During the appeal, the husband contended that the trial judge had incorrectly broadened the public policy exception, however, the Court of Appeal disagreed, highlighting that “unfair forum-shopping tactics” could serve as grounds for rejecting the recognition of a foreign divorce.
The court noted that similar to concepts like “fraud” and “natural justice,” “unfair forum-shopping tactics” constitute a distinct category from the public policy defense. While forum-shopping might not always contravene moral principles, “unfair forum-shopping tactics” undoubtedly do. Accordingly, the Appeal Court found no basis to interfere.
This decision reiterates the legal system’s steadfast dedication to ensuring fair and equitable spousal support arrangements by emphasizing the significant ramifications that could arise from attempting to circumvent these obligations through complex international legal strategies. Such maneuvers not only undermine the integrity of the legal process but also pose a threat to the financial stability and well-being of the individuals involved in the divorce proceedings.
This blog was written by Shanza Sohail, an Associate Lawyer here at Russell Alexander Collaborative Family Lawyers.
