BACKGROUND:
This case dealt with the effect of a foreign divorce on a spouse’s ability to claim spousal support in Ontario.
The parties were married in 2008 and lived together in Bahrain before moving to Ontario in 2019. Shortly after an argument in June 2019, the Husband returned to Bahrain and participated in a divorce ceremony without the Wife being present or having advance notice. He later had that divorce confirmed by a court in Bahrain.
The Wife argued that the marriage continued after 2019. In her view, the parties did not actually separate until May 2022. She relied on the fact that the Husband continued travelling to Ontario, purchased a home in Newmarket for her and their daughter to live in and stayed at that home when he was in Ontario.
The court ultimately refused to recognize the Bahrain divorce. This meant the Wife could still claim spousal support under the Divorce Act. However, the court also considered whether she could have claimed support under Ontario’s Family Law Act if the foreign divorce had been recognized.
ISSUE:
Can a former spouse claim spousal support under Ontario’s Family Law Act after a foreign divorce?
ANALYSIS:
Historically, Ontario courts followed a different approach. In cases like Okmyansky v. Okmyansky, the Court of Appeal held that where there was a valid foreign divorce, the former spouse could not claim spousal support under the Divorce Act. The Court of Appeal also found that spousal support could not be claimed under the Family Law Act because there was no provision allowing it.
In Rasaei v. Bahman, the court pushed back against that distinction. Justice Finlayson noted that the older cases did not deeply analyze the wording of the Family Law Act. The discussion of spousal support under the Family Law Act in Okmyansky was brief. In the court’s view, that made it possible to take a fresh look at the issue.
The court also relied on recent Court of Appeal comments in Vyazemskaya v. Safin and Sonia v. Ratan, where the Court of Appeal suggested that the old line of cases may need to be reconsidered. Those cases recognized that denying support after a foreign divorce can create serious unfairness for a spouse who still needs financial support.
The court’s reasoning was rooted in the purpose of spousal support. Justice Finlayson emphasized that support obligations arise because of the relationship itself, not because of the divorce proceeding. In other words, the need for support does not disappear simply because one spouse obtained a divorce in another country. If the marriage created financial dependency, or if one spouse suffered economic consequences from the relationship, those issues may still need to be addressed in Ontario.
The court also found that the wording of the Family Law Act could be read broadly enough to include former spouses. The Act defines “spouse” more broadly for support purposes, and it also recognizes cohabitation within or outside marriage. On the facts of this case, the parties had a long marriage, had a child together and resumed aspects of their relationship after the Bahrain divorce. For that reason, the Wife could still fit within the support provisions of the Family Law Act.
CONCLUSION:
The court refused to recognize the Bahrain divorce. As a result, the Wife was entitled to pursue spousal support under the Divorce Act.
However, the more significant part of the decision is the court’s alternative finding. Justice Finlayson held that even if the Bahrain divorce had been recognized, the Wife could still claim spousal support under Ontario’s Family Law Act.
Rasaei is a differentiating case because it moves away from cases with contrary findings such as Okmyansky. It suggests that a foreign divorce may not automatically prevent a former spouse from seeking support in Ontario, especially where the relationship had a strong connection to Ontario and the need for support remains. That said, Rasaei should still be read carefully. It is a Superior Court decision, and the Family Law Act discussion was made in the alternative.
Attention Legal Counsel: Professional Mediation Services
When your clients have reached an impasse in settlement discussions, Andrew Feldstein offers third-party mediation services specifically designed for cases where both parties have independent legal representation.
Why lawyers refer cases to Andrew:
- 30+ years family law litigation experience providing courtroom-informed reality testing
- Expertise in complex financial matters including business valuations and professional corporations
- Efficient, structured process that respects counsel’s time and maintains client relationships
- Flexible scheduling including virtual mediation and travel to counsel offices
Cases we handle: Negotiation stalemates, complex asset division, support calculation disputes, parenting arrangements, multi-jurisdictional matters, and post-separation modifications.
Refer your next mediation: Call Andrew directly at 905-415-1635 ext. 255 or email info@separation.ca. Virtual and in-person sessions available throughout the GTA.