1) A separation agreement was made between M & F (both Canadian) but living in California.
2) The agreement states that F entirely owns n Properties in Canada.
3) M moves back to Canada, and over 10 years later wants to challenge the separation agreement.
4) The case is circulating the courts now, and M is claiming the separation agreement is one-sided and unfair. M wants some of the properties and has placed a CPL(lein) on F's properties in the meantime.
5) F is forced to constantly travel between Canada & California to deal with this.
How is it possible that the Canadian courts are even considering this? Do they have jurisdiction to over-turn a separation agreement made in California?
M believes that F gave the BC Supreme court jurisdiction by replying to M's motion with a counterclaim. Is this a true, does it really work that way?
Thank you. Please let me know if you require any clarification.