The appellants sought to enforce a Florida default judgment for damages arising from a real estate transaction against the respondents in Ontario.
The trial judge dismissed the action, finding the Florida judgment was obtained by fraud and its enforcement would contravene public policy.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal against most respondents, holding that the fraud defence requires newly discovered facts that could not have been discovered with reasonable diligence, which the respondents failed to demonstrate.
The public policy defence was also rejected.
However, the appeal was dismissed against one respondent whose absolute discharge from bankruptcy released her from the judgment debt.
