Real and substantial connection governs recognition of sister-province judgments, and reciprocal enforcement statutes do not displace the common law rule.

A sister-province judgment is recognised and enforced where the originating court properly exercised jurisdiction on a real and substantial connection between the forum and the action. The common law rule was treated as better suited to Canadian interprovincial relations than a rigid foreign-judgment approach, because constitutional unity, mobility, order and fairness support enforcement. Reciprocal enforcement legislation was also described as procedural only and not as displacing common law recognition where its requirements are met, so it does not bar enforcement simply because the debtor did not submit to the original court.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a personal judgment validly obtained in one province against a defendant served outside that province can be enforced in another province; (ii) whether reciprocal enforcement legislation excludes resort to the common law rule of recognition where the original court exercised jurisdiction on a real and substantial connection.

Issue (i): Whether a personal judgment validly obtained in one province against a defendant served outside that province can be enforced in another province.

Analysis: The common law rule derived from foreign judgment doctrine was too rigid for the Canadian federation. Interprovincial relations are governed by constitutional unity, mobility, and the need for order and fairness. Recognition should depend on whether the originating court properly or appropriately exercised jurisdiction, which requires a real and substantial connection between the forum and the subject matter of the action. The Alberta proceedings had such a connection because the mortgages, land, and underlying transactions were in Alberta.

Conclusion: The Alberta judgments were enforceable in British Columbia and the respondent was entitled to recognition and enforcement.

Issue (ii): Whether reciprocal enforcement legislation excluded recognition of the judgment at common law where the judgment debtor had not submitted to the foreign court.

Analysis: The reciprocal enforcement statutes were procedural and were not intended to alter or freeze the common law rules of private international law. They did not bar an action to enforce a sister-province judgment where the common law requirements for recognition were satisfied.

Conclusion: The legislation did not prevent enforcement of the Alberta judgments.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed because a sister-province judgment is enforceable where the original court had properly exercised jurisdiction on a real and substantial connection, and the reciprocal enforcement legislation did not displace that common law rule.

Ratio Decidendi: In the Canadian federation, a province must recognize and enforce a judgment from another province when the original court had properly exercised jurisdiction on the basis of a real and substantial connection with the action.

---