CANADA Law and Practice Contributed by: John Pirie, Matthew Latella, David Gadsden and Christina Doria, Baker McKenzie
leave to appeal to SCC refused 37460 and 37463 (15 June 2017). 2.6 Unenforceable Domestic Judgments Generally, domestic judgments will be enforced, sub - ject to the grounds to challenge enforcement set out in 2.5 Challenging Enforcement of Domestic Judg- ments . 2.7 Register of Domestic Judgments Canada does not have a central register of all judg - ments, but execution and judgment searches can be carried out on a province-by-province basis. A judg - ment debtor who has paid a creditor in full can obtain a satisfaction piece for filing in the court. This is a formal court document acknowledging that the debtor has paid the creditor in full satisfaction of the judg - ment. 3. Foreign Judgments 3.1 Legal Issues Concerning Enforcement of Foreign Judgments There are three routes to enforce foreign judgments in Canada: • at common law; Canadian courts will generally enforce a foreign mon - ey judgment under the following circumstances. • The court giving judgment is a judicial body or tribunal regularly established and exercising the jurisdiction conferred upon it by the relevant com - petent authority. • The court had proper personal and subject-matter jurisdiction according to Canadian rules regarding the conflict of laws. Jurisdiction is viewed as being properly taken if: (a) the court had proper in personam jurisdiction over the defendant; (b) there is a real and substantial connection between the foreign jurisdiction and the subject matter of the proceeding; or • under legislation; or • pursuant to a treaty. Foreign Money Judgments
(c) the defendant attorned to or by contract agreed to the jurisdiction of the foreign court. • The foreign judgment is for a debt or a definite sum of money. • The judgment is final and conclusive with respect to the rights and liabilities of the parties to it, so as to be res judicata in a foreign jurisdiction, although Canadian courts may recognise and enforce interlocutory orders as long as they meet the requirement of finality. For an interlocutory order to be recognised and enforced, the foreign court’s jurisdiction to vary or set aside the judgment must be exhausted. Consistent with the finality requirement, the Ontario Court of Appeal has repeatedly held that it is not “legally appropriate” to commence enforcement pro - ceedings before “all appeal remedies [in the foreign jurisdiction] have been exhausted” ( Independence Plaza , 2017 ONCA 44 at para 77; Presidential MSH Corporation v Marr Foster & Co . LLP , 2017 ONCA 325 at paras 29–48). Recently, the Court of Appeal has explicitly rejected a direct challenge to its juris - prudence establishing this principle ( Sunlight Gen- eral Capital LLC v Effisolar Energy Corporation , 2023 ONCA 133 at para 12). Canadian courts will not, however, enforce the fol - lowing. • Taxes and penalties – enforcing a judgment that is criminal, quasi-criminal or regulatory would offend the principles of territoriality, as the public law of a country should not be applied beyond its territory ( Pro Swing Inc v Elta Golf Inc , 2006 SCC 52) (“ Pro Swing ”). • Indeterminate monetary orders – interim orders (whether for costs or damages) that do not meet the requirements of finality and clarity will not be enforceable, given that: (a) finality requires that a foreign order establishes an obligation that is complete and defined; and (b) clarity means that someone unfamiliar with the case would be able to ascertain what is required to meet the terms of the order.
75 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook