Best Canadian International Family Lawyers need to understand how differing jurisdictions handle different types of family law cases, including, parenting and guardianship of children, spousal and child support, and property division of worldwide assets and property.
MacLean Law’s, Lorne N MacLean, KC, is a member of the, invitation only, Academy of International Family Lawyers. IAFL is a worldwide association of practicing lawyers who are recognized by their peers as the most experienced and skilled family law specialists in their respective countries. If you are looking for some the best Canadian international family lawyers, contact us. Our firm handles ultra high net worth family and divorce cases which often go hand in hand with international family law matters.
Going through separation is tough enough. Having your family’s future decided in not just one, but potentially two different courts in two different countries, can be far more daunting. The idea of navigating different legal systems, language barriers, and the sheer expense of it all can feel overwhelming. For families with ties to multiple countries, deciding where to resolve critical issues like property division, parenting arrangements, and support can become an International Jurisdiction Dispute in itself.
Navigating International Jurisdiction Disputes in Family Law
This challenge was recently highlighted in the British Columbia Supreme Court case of Florescu v. Lodato, 2025 BCSC 1950. In this case, the parties faced the very real concern of having their matters split between Italy and British Columbia, leading to multiple proceedings and the potential for conflicting decisions (Florescu para. 12). In this article, senior MacLean Law associate Jonathan Wai reviews and explains the decision in that case. The Best Canadian International Family Lawyers understand this is a complex area and speed and tenacity matters. Our international family law jurisdictional win in Devathasan and our worldwide Mareva freezing injunction dealt with a dispute over whether Singapore or BC should decide the issues of spousal support, child support, family property division and costs. The case attracted international attention.
The Florescu v. Lodato Case: A Tale of Two Jurisdictions
In Florescu v. Lodato, the parties were married in Italy and had two children. The wife and the children moved to British Columbia in 2014 and have resided there since, while the husband largely remained in Italy. When their relationship ended, the wife initiated legal proceedings in British Columbia.
Both parties agreed that British Columbia was the appropriate forum for deciding parenting and support issues, given that the wife and the children lived there, and had for more than 10 years. However, the question of where to divide their family property became a central International Jurisdiction Dispute. All family property, apart from the wife’s pension and car, was located in Italy, including the family home and other real estate. British Columbia did technically have “territorial jurisdiction” to hear the property division, but the issue was, which was the best court to hear the issue of property division, British Columbia or Italy.
Vancouver Best Canadian International Family Lawyers
Further, from expert evidence, it was clear that Italian law would apply to the property in Italy. As explained below, Italy is apparently a “community of property” regime, whereby parties who marry there, form rights to property upon marriage, and thus that property is governed by the law of that jurisdiction, even if the parties later move to another jurisdiction. For this and other reasons, the husband argued that Italy was the more suitable jurisdiction for property and debt division due to the location of assets, witnesses, and the applicable law.
How Courts Decide: The Forum Non Conveniens Analysis
When faced with an International Jurisdiction Dispute, courts in British Columbia engage in a detailed analysis to determine if they should hear a case or if another country’s court is “clearly more appropriate” (Florescu para. 19). This occurs is where, like in Florescu, two courts do technically have jurisdiction to decide an issue, in this case family property. Deciding which court is more appropriate for this is known as a forum non conveniens analysis. The party asking the court to decline jurisdiction has the responsibility to prove that the other forum is clearly more appropriate. The best international family disputes lawyers can guide you in this tricky area.
Here are the key factors the court weighed:
- Relative convenience and expense for spouses and witnesses:
- The court noted that travel would be necessary for both parties regardless of where the case was heard (Florescu 24).
- The husband, residing in Italy, had more flexibility to travel to British Columbia (Florescu 25).
- However, a trial in British Columbia would involve significant costs for translating documents and interpreting for Italian-speaking witnesses (Florescu 27-29).
- Conversely, a trial in Italy would be less costly for these aspects (Florescu 29).
- Ultimately, the court found that the relative convenience slightly favored British Columbia, given the children were here (although they were close to adulthood) but the relative expense favored Italy (Florescu 24).
- Applicable law:
- The parties were married in Italy, which has a community property regime (Florescu 2-3).
- Under Section 108 of British Columbia’s Family Law Act, Italian law was determined to be the applicable law for property division because Italy was the parties’ first common habitual residence (Florescu 30-32).
- Applying foreign law in British Columbia would require expert evidence and translation, adding complexity and cost (Florescu 32). This factor strongly favored Italy as the more appropriate forum (Florescu para. 32).
- Avoiding multiple proceedings and conflicting decisions:
- The court acknowledged that if property division proceeded in Italy while parenting and support were handled in British Columbia, there would be multiple proceedings (Florescu 36). Generally, the courts prefer not to have multiple proceedings with the same parties, but that is not a hard and fast rule.
- In any case, it found there was little risk of conflicting decisions because each court would address different issues (Florescu 36). This factor only slightly favored British Columbia (Florescu para. 36).
- Enforceability of orders:
- The court considered whether a British Columbia order would be enforceable in Italy and vice versa (Florescu 37-45).
- While there was some debate among legal experts, the court found no clear evidence that a British Columbia order would not be enforceable in Italy, especially if it predated any Italian judicial proceeding on the same matter (Florescu 38-44).
- Canadian courts are also generally likely to enforce Italian judgments (Florescu 44). This factor was considered neutral (Florescu para. 45).
- Fair and efficient working of the Canadian legal system:
- The court concluded that it would be more efficient for Italy to handle the property division (Florescu 46).
- This was due to the logistical challenges of applying Italian law and managing the extensive translation and interpretation needs if the case were heard in British Columbia (Florescu 46).
- Other relevant circumstances:
- The court noted that it is generally preferable not to separate property division from spousal support, as these issues are often linked (Florescu 47). However, it recognized that this could be managed by sequencing orders appropriately, more particularly by making interim spousal support orders, and awaiting the property decision from the Italian court (Florescu para. 47-48)
Ultimately, the court concluded, perhaps narrowly, that Italy was clearly the more appropriate forum for dividing the family property and debts (Florescu para. 49-50). This decision meant that while parenting and support would be decided in British Columbia, the property division aspect of the International Jurisdiction Dispute would proceed in Italy.
Key Takeaways for Families Facing International Jurisdiction Disputes
The Florescu v. Lodato case offers important insights for anyone navigating a separation with international elements:
- Location of Assets Matters: Where your property is located can significantly influence which country’s courts are best suited to divide it (Florescu 49).
- Language and Logistics: The language of documents and witnesses, and the associated costs of translation and interpretation, are major considerations in International Jurisdiction Disputes (Florescu 27-29, 46).
- Applicable Law: The law of the country where you were married or where you last habitually resided together can determine which legal system governs your property division, even if you now live elsewhere (Florescu 30-32). This is particularly so, if country in which you were married is a “community of property” regime (British Columbia itself is not, as marital rights to property are effectively deferred until separation).
- Efficiency and Fairness: Courts aim for a fair and efficient resolution, which often means sending parts of a case to the jurisdiction that can handle them most effectively (Florescu 46).
- Seek Expert Legal opinions in the other Jurisdiction: The law of the foreign jurisdiction must be proved by an expert in that jurisdiction, usually a lawyer from that jurisdiction. The court requires this, to make determinations about what the law of that foreign jurisdiction is.
The above case is an example of “splitting jurisdiction”, meaning two trials in two different countries, and is comparatively rare. While that sounds complex on its own, we at MacLean Law have robust experience split jurisdiction case, and moreover in even more complex International Jurisdiction Dispute cases, including where the issues of parenting are not as clear cut as they were in Florescu, or where significant property exists in both or even multiple jurisdictions. We are amply familiar with obtaining the requisite foreign legal opinions to determine whether the foreign jurisdiction is a “community of property regime” or not, as it was found to be in Florescu. The Best Canadian International Family Lawyers will help increase your chances of a negotiated, arbitrated or litigated resolution of your international family law case.
Best Canadian International Family Lawyers Can Help But You Must Act Quickly
For families facing the complexities of cross-border separations, understanding these factors is crucial. It underscores the importance of careful planning and legal advice to navigate these challenging International Jurisdiction Disputes effectively. Please do not hesitate to consult us if you and your family are facing this issue and are looking for the best international family disputes lawyers.
