The parties married in Belgium and moved to Ontario shortly before separating.
The appellant husband initiated divorce proceedings in Belgium, while the respondent wife initiated proceedings in Ontario, including claims for property equalization.
The Belgian court ruled it had jurisdiction over the liquidation of the matrimonial regime but not the divorce itself.
The appellant brought a motion in Ontario arguing that Ontario lacked jurisdiction over the property claims or, alternatively, that Belgium was the clearly more appropriate forum (forum non conveniens).
The motion judge dismissed the motion.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the decision, finding no error in the motion judge's conclusion that Ontario had jurisdiction and that the appellant failed to show Belgium was the clearly more appropriate forum, especially given the risk of multiplicity of proceedings if the property claims were split from the divorce and support claims.
