This bill replaces New Brunswick’s prior Canadian Judgments Act with a new Enforcement of Canadian Judgments Act that standardizes how judgments from other Canadian provinces and territories are registered and enforced in New Brunswick. It permits registration of most out‑of‑province civil judgments (with defined exclusions), sets a documentary procedure for registration, and makes a registered judgment enforceable as if entered in the Court of King’s Bench.
Significantly, the bill separately addresses Canadian civil protection orders: whether or not they are registered they are deemed orders of the Court of King’s Bench and may be enforced by New Brunswick law enforcement. The Act narrows the grounds on which the Court of King’s Bench may set aside registration, preserves time limits on enforcement, authorizes recovery of registration costs, and repeals the former statute with transitional rules for pending cases.
At a Glance
What It Does
The Act allows an enforcing party to register an out‑of‑province Canadian judgment (subject to exclusions and finality rules for money orders) by filing prescribed documents and a fee with the Court of King’s Bench; once registered, the judgment may be enforced as if entered in that court. It separately deems Canadian civil protection orders to be Court of King’s Bench orders and authorizes police enforcement and statutory immunity for good‑faith enforcement actions.
Who It Affects
Out‑of‑province judgment creditors (including tribunals certifying monetary amounts), New Brunswick defendants who face registration of foreign judgments, clerks and registrars who will process filings, and law enforcement agencies charged with enforcing civil protection orders. The provincial government will also administer regulations that set fees and affidavit requirements.
Why It Matters
The bill reduces procedural friction for enforcing interprovincial judgments and gives immediate enforceability to protection orders across provincial lines. That changes how creditors and victims secure remedies in New Brunswick and limits judicial re‑litigation of substantive issues once a judgment is registered, shifting more responsibility to administrative registration and on‑the‑ground enforcement by police.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Act creates a single registration route for most judgments rendered by courts or tribunals in other Canadian provinces and territories. For money judgments, the judgment must be final to be registered; non‑monetary orders can be registered even if not final.
The text lists explicit exclusions — for example, maintenance/support orders, penal fines, probate matters, and orders concerning minors (except civil protection orders) — and bars registration of certain out‑of‑province judgments against New Brunswick residents who did not participate in the original proceeding when the judgment enforces consumer contracts or local employment contracts.
To register, the enforcing party pays a regulation‑prescribed fee and files a certified copy of the judgment plus an affidavit and any other required documents with a clerk of the Court of King’s Bench; the clerk must register on receipt. A registered judgment is enforceable in New Brunswick as though it had been entered in the Court of King’s Bench, subject to applicable time limits and equitable defences for non‑monetary relief.
Interest accrues according to the judgment’s terms or, absent a rate, by the law of the originating jurisdiction.The Court of King’s Bench may hear applications to set aside registration or give directions, but the grounds for setting aside are tightly constrained: the court can act where there is an intervening stay, a proceeding to vary or set aside in the originating jurisdiction, or where local practice requires modification to make the judgment enforceable. The court may not reopen questions of the originating court’s jurisdiction under private international law, re‑decide factual or legal findings, or void a judgment for process defects.Civil protection orders from other Canadian jurisdictions receive special treatment: whether registered or not, they are deemed to be orders of the Court of King’s Bench and may be enforced by New Brunswick law enforcement in the same manner as local court orders.
The Act expressly allows enforcement even if the originating order specifies a different enforcing agency and grants immunity to police and agencies for actions or omissions done in good faith while enforcing such orders.The Act gives the Lieutenant‑Governor in Council regulation‑making power to prescribe fees and affidavit content, and it repeals the prior Canadian Judgments Act while preserving that earlier statute’s application for certain pending matters involving absent defendants. The government will bring provisions into force by proclamation.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Act requires a certified copy of the foreign judgment plus a regulation‑prescribed affidavit and fee; the Court clerk must register the judgment on receiving those documents (section 5).
Money judgments may be registered only if final; non‑monetary orders can be registered even if not final, but a registered money judgment cannot be enforced if the origin or New Brunswick limitation period has expired (sections 4 and 7).
A registered Canadian judgment is enforceable in New Brunswick as if it were entered in the Court of King’s Bench, including recovery of registration costs by the enforcing party (sections 6 and 11).
The Court of King’s Bench may set aside or limit registration in narrow circumstances (stays, variations or pending proceedings in the originating jurisdiction, or to conform to local practice) but may not refuse registration on grounds such as lack of jurisdiction under New Brunswick private international law, differing factual findings, or process defects (section 9(3)–(4)).
Canadian civil protection orders are deemed Court of King’s Bench orders and may be enforced by New Brunswick law enforcement without registration; officers acting in good faith have statutory immunity (sections 14–16).
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definitions, exclusions and scope
Part 1 sets the vocabulary and the Act’s reach. It defines “Canadian judgment” to include judgments, tribunal monetary orders enforceable as superior court judgments in their origin, Canadian tax judgments, and Canadian civil protection orders, while explicitly excluding support/maintenance orders, penal fines, probate, most family‑law care orders for minors, and foreign judgments. The application clause distinguishes between judgments from proceedings commenced before or after commencement and treats civil protection orders as always covered, which preserves reach for protection orders regardless of timing.
Registration mechanics and enforcement consequences
This part lays out who may register, what may be registered, documentary prerequisites, and the ministerial registration duty of a Court clerk upon receipt of fee and documents. It limits registration of monetary awards to final judgments, carves out specific non‑registerable scenarios for NB residents who didn’t participate (consumer goods and local employment contracts), and makes a registered judgment enforceable as an order entered in the Court of King’s Bench. It also addresses time bars, interest calculation tied to the origin jurisdiction or judgment terms, recovery of registration costs, and forbids bringing a separate action on the foreign judgment.
Civil protection orders and policing powers
Part 3 treats Canadian civil protection orders (interprovincial restraining orders, etc.) differently from ordinary judgments: whether registered or not, a protection order is deemed to be an order of the Court of King’s Bench and may be enforced like any court order. Law enforcement agencies may enforce such orders even if the originating order designates a different enforcing body, and the statute provides immunity for agencies and officers for acts or omissions done in good faith while enforcing those orders. Practically, this creates immediate operational authority for police to act on out‑of‑province protection orders.
Regulations and administrative detail
The Lieutenant‑Governor in Council gains powers to prescribe the registration fee, the affidavit content and other required documents, to define undefined terms for the Act’s administration, and to fill in any ancillary rules needed for operation. Much of the Act’s day‑to‑day effect — what must go in the affidavit, how fees are set, and other procedural traps — will be controlled by those regulations.
Transition, consequential amendments and repeal
Part 5 repeals the previous Canadian Judgments Act and its regulation, updates cross‑references in other provincial statutes, and contains a transitional clause preserving application of the old Act for specific pending matters where a defendant did not participate. The Act comes into force by proclamation, so operational timing and sequencing (including the issuing of regulations) will determine when registration and enforcement under this new framework can actually begin.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Victims with out‑of‑province protection orders — they get immediate enforceability in New Brunswick and police have clear authority to act even without registration, improving cross‑jurisdictional safety measures.
- Out‑of‑province creditors and tribunals — they gain a straightforward administrative path to enforce money and non‑money judgments in New Brunswick, reducing the need for fresh litigation in provincial court.
- Provincial law enforcement and courts — they get statutory clarity on enforcement powers and a clear legal basis for acting on foreign protection orders, which can streamline responses to cross‑border threats.
Who Bears the Cost
- New Brunswick defendants who face enforcement of foreign judgments — they may confront faster enforcement and limited grounds to relitigate jurisdictional or factual issues in New Brunswick courts.
- Court of King’s Bench and clerks — they will process registrations, hear more applications to set aside or for directions, and may face additional administrative and docket pressure without explicit funding in the Act.
- Law enforcement agencies — while given authority and immunity, police must allocate time and training to enforce out‑of‑province protection orders and manage potentially contested enforcement incidents, creating operational costs for local forces.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill walks a tight line between making interprovincial enforcement swift and predictable (and giving victims immediate protection) and preserving New Brunswick residents’ procedural protections and local courts’ ability to scrutinize foreign judgments; the more the law favors streamlined enforcement, the more it risks importing judgments that would not survive fuller judicial scrutiny in New Brunswick.
The Act prioritizes administrative registration and narrow judicial review over substantive re‑examination of foreign judgments. That raises two implementation tensions.
First, limiting the Court of King’s Bench’s ability to refuse registration on jurisdictional or process‑defect grounds could enable enforcement in New Brunswick of orders from jurisdictions that apply different procedural safeguards or standards of jurisdiction; the Act relies on originating courts and stays to police those gaps rather than New Brunswick courts. Second, granting police power to enforce civil protection orders without registration (and providing immunity for good‑faith acts) improves victim protection but increases the risk of enforcement mistakes where an order was issued without notice or where facts differ materially; the Act does not create a fast, uniform two‑way review mechanism for challenged protection orders on New Brunswick soil.
Operationally, the Act leaves many practical questions to regulation and court practice: what must be included in the affidavit, fee levels that could affect access to enforcement, and how clerks will verify certificates from different tribunals. The transitional rule that preserves the old statute for certain pending matters mitigates abrupt change but opens a window for forum selection strategies and may complicate litigants’ decisions about where to apply for enforcement.
Finally, the Act’s prohibition on actions on the judgment shifts all enforcement into the registration/enforcement stream, concentrating challenges into Court of King’s Bench procedures and administrative filings — an efficiency trade‑off that may burden the court if not resourced properly.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.