The respondent brought a motion to set aside an order validating service of a divorce application outside Canada and the resulting final divorce order.
The court considered whether the orders could be set aside under rule 25(19) of the Family Law Rules on the basis of fraud, mistake, or absence of notice.
The court found that the applicant failed to disclose material facts when seeking validation of service, including knowledge of the respondent’s residential address in Ontario and information regarding her expected return to Canada.
This material non‑disclosure occurred in the context of a motion brought without notice and constituted fraud on the court process.
As a result, the order validating service and the final divorce order were both set aside.
