restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws section 98 holds that a foreign judgment \States so far as the immediate parties and the underlying claim are concerned.\ As with a judgment from another state, a foreign court judgment may be challenged on grounds, such as the absence of personal or subject matter jurisdiction in the original forum, lack of reasonable notice, or fraud. In the international context, where there is no requirement of full faith and credit, courts have discretion to deny comity when there is a strong public policy objection to the foreign judgment.
4 In order to give effect to the property or support aspects of foreign country divorce or separation decrees, a state court must be satisfied that the foreign court acquired personal jurisdiction over the respondent spouse. This is tested under the standards applied to cases in the United States. In addition, the respondent spouse must have received adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard. When these conditions are met, even a foreign default judgment may be recognized on the basis of comity.
(2) Uniform Foreign Money judgments recognition Act
5 The Uniform Foreign Money Judgments Recognition Act (UFMJRA), and its successor, the Uniform Foreign Country Money Judgments Recognition Act (UFCMJRA), codified common law comity principles to allow enforcement of foreign country judgments in state courts on the same terms as judgments of other states. By its terms, the UFMJRA does not apply to \for support in matrimonial or family matters,%under the UIFSA. In some states, the UFMJRA has been applied to other types of money judgments in divorce cases, such as property division orders, and some states have enacted nonuniform versions of the statute extending to all types of matrimonial claims, including spousal support.168 The more recent UFCMJRA has a broader exclusion for any \rendered in connection with domestic relations.\ Both versions of the act reaffirm that matrimonial judgments may be recognized based on comity or other legal principles.
41
6 In the small group of jurisdictions in which the original UFMJRA may offer a basis for recognition of foreign divorce money judgments, section three of the act provides that the judgment \sister state that is entitled to full faith and credit.\grounds for nonrecognition of a foreign country judgment, including lack of personal or subject matter jurisdiction in the issuing court or a finding that \rendered under a system which does not provide impartial tribunals or procedures compatible with the requirements of due process of law.\(3) Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA)
7 UIFSA establishes a procedure through which a state tribunal may register and enforce a spousal support order entered in another state. The same procedure is available for support orders entered in certain foreign countries. In cases that include both child and spousal support orders, the spousal support creditor may be eligible for free services from the local child support recovery unit, established in each state under federal law. These services are available in both interstate and international cases. 8 The version of UIFSA adopted in 2008 allows registration and enforcement of a foreign spousal support order if the order was entered by a court in a country that meets the definition of \four categories: countries that have been declared to be \reciprocating countries\with a particular state, countries that have \law or established procedures for the issuance and enforcement of support orders which are substantially similar to the procedures under UIFSA,\in force with respect to the United States. Foreign country spousal support orders that meet the statutory definition in UIFSA section 102( 5), and which are registered for enforcement under UIFSA section 601, are \forceable in the same manner and … subject to the same procedures\ The law of the issuing tribunal governs most questions, including the \extent, amount, and duration of current payments\payment of arrearages and interest.
42
9 UIFSA generally applies the same procedures to both spousal and child support proceedings, but it draws a distinction between the jurisdiction needed to modify the two types of support orders. Under UIFSA section 211(a), the court that enters a spousal support order maintains \order throughout its existence. Any proceeding to modify or terminate spousal support must therefore be brought in the original forum, even if neither of the parties continues to live in that jurisdiction. In international cases, the rule of continuing jurisdiction presented difficulties if the foreign tribunal that issued an initial spousal support order considered its jurisdiction to terminate after all parties had left the forum. In this circumstance, there was no forum with jurisdiction to modify within the parameters of UIFSA. As amended in 2008, section 211(b) will permit a state court to modify a foreign spousal-support order if the tribunal that issued it no longer has jurisdiction to modify.
10 UIFSA preserves the possibility that a support order from a foreign jurisdiction that is not a \country\may be recognized and enforced on the basis of comity, and section 105(b) permits a court to \the procedural and substantive provisions\of UIFSA in such a case. Recognition of another country's support order on this basis is discretionary, however, while recognition and enforcement of \definition is mandatory.
(4) Foreign Recognition of U.S. Marital Property and Support Judgment
11 There is no broad multilateral treaty on recognition and enforcement of marital property orders. The United States has not joined the 1970 Hague Convention on the Recognition of Divorces and Legal Separations, which is in effect in eighteen countries and which specifically does not apply to ancillary orders, including \related to pecuniary obligations.\
12 Financial judgments in U.S. divorce cases may be recognized based on comity in common law jurisdictions including England, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. For enforcement of these judgments, additional requirements apply, analogous to the U.S. rules that require personal jurisdiction over petitioner and
43
respondent to adjudicate property rights. In civil law countries, recognition and enforcement of financial judgments often require an exequatur proceeding, and may depend on proof that reciprocal treatment would be extended to comparable orders from that country. Foreign financial judgments may be enforced in Mexico, if the foreign court had jurisdiction in accordance with Mexican principles of jurisdiction and other conditions are met. This rule does not apply to judgments concerning title to real property in Mexico as these are within the exclusive jurisdiction of Mexican courts.
13 Financial orders entered by a court in a divorce proceeding in the United States, based on personal jurisdiction acquired through a minimum contacts approach or tag jurisdiction, may prove difficult to enforce in a country that does not accept these grounds for jurisdiction. It should be possible to argue for foreign recognition of a U.S. order if the court exercised jurisdiction in factual circumstances that would provide an adequate basis for personal jurisdiction under the relevant foreign law. 14 In the support context, the United States has not participated in multilateral international treaties governing recognition and enforcement of family support orders, such as the 1956 New York Convention on the Recovery Abroad of Maintenance or the 1973 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions Relating to Maintenance Obligations. Although U.S. spousal support orders are therefore not recognized under these treaties, they may be recognized and enforced in other countries based on comity or an exequatur proceeding, or pursuant to bilateral agreements at the state or federal level. When it comes into effect, the 2007 Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance will mandate recognition and enforcement of spousal support as well as child support orders.
Exercises
I. Questions for discussion:
1.How can the marital property and support orders be enforced? 1
44
2. Why do the American law require that a court have personal jurisdiction over both spouses to enter orders concerning property or support matters, financial aspects of an ex-parte foreign divorce will not be given effect based on comity?2
3.What does the Uniform Foreign Money Judgments Recognition Act codify common law comity principles?5
4. What is the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act for? 7/8/9
5. Can the U.S. Marital Property and Support Judgment be recognized in foreign countries?
II. Write a summary of the text with 150 words.
Section D Translation Skill---
ANSWERS Section A
II. Choose the best answer for each of the following according to the text: 1. B 2. C 3. A 4. A 5. D
III. Fill in the following blanks with the given words below
1. respondent 2. divisible divorce 3. hearing 4. divorce 5. forum 6. tag jurisdiction
7. lis pendens 8. jurisdiction 9. matter 10. personal jurisdiction IV. Translate the following passage into Chinese:
在可分割的离婚诉讼管辖权原则下，州法院基于原告的住所或居住地而作出的单方面离婚判决在每个州都能得到完全信任。但若涉及到婚姻财产分割和抚养义务时，只有该管辖法院对原被告双方都有属人管辖权时，其判决才会被信任和认可。基于上述规则，美国法院以礼让规则承认很多国外单方离婚判决的效力，但并不承认和执行外国法院作出的财产判决，除非该法院具有完全的人身管辖权。 Section B
I. Write T (true) or F (false) for each statement of the following according to what you
45
