Re-Sealing Foreign Guardianship: Applying the Fisher Decision to Israeli Orders

By Yasmin M. Vinograd lawyer at Merovitz Potechin LLP on Thursday March 26, 2026

In 2018, I wrote about resealing foreign guardianship. Not a lot has changed in this area, until the decision of Justice Mayers in Fisher v. Danilunas, 2025 ONSC 4359 came out in July 2025 (the “Fisher decision”). A lot has been said about the Fisher decision since it was released, including at the 2026 Annotated Guardianship Application program where Matthew Furrow reviewed the caselaw of the past 100 years and the shift that the Fisher decision represents.

The Impact of the Fisher Decision (2025 ONSC 4359)

My colleague, Keri Gillespie, recently blogged about this decision. In short, in the Fisher decision, Justice Myers held that as long as the foreign court had a real and substantive connection to the incapable person and had followed proper procedures to protect that individual’s rights (so as not to violate Canadian public policy or natural justice), Ontario courts should respect the foreign order.

The Fisher decision highlighted the need for expert opinion or other formal evidence. This evidence must detail the foreign legislative scheme and protections for incapable persons in the foreign jurisdiction. That opinion should demonstrate that the foreign legislative scheme reflects the same public policy considerations that underlie Ontario guardianship law, including:

1. Protection of personal autonomy;
2. Protection of vulnerable individuals;
3. Judicial oversight of substitute decision-makers; and
4. Proportional intervention when a person cannot manage their affairs.

Case Study: Re-sealing an Israeli Guardianship Order

I recently had an application to re-seal an Israeli guardianship order. Relying on the Fisher decision, the court sought evidence that, amongst other things, the Israeli order was not obtained by fraud or a breach of natural justice, and would not violate Canadian public policy as well as the real and substantial connection to Israel.

Based on the evidence provided regarding the guardianship process and the protections awarded to alleged incapable people and people who have had a guardian appointed to them in Israel, the court was satisfied that the Israeli guardianship order ought to be re-sealed in Ontario and recognized as a valid guardianship order.

This order avoids the delay and significant expense of commencing a new Ontario guardianship application. Instead, the court relied on the capacity determination already made in the appropriate forum, Israel.

Foreign Guardianship Orders in Ontario and Real Property

It is unclear whether this order would have been possible had the incapable person held real property in Ontario. The current caselaw suggests that a foreign court has no authority over real property located in Ontario and as a result, if an incapable person has real property in Ontario, a guardianship application has to be commenced in Ontario to appoint a guardian who will then have the authority to deal with the real property. However, the Fisher decision appears to open the door to possibly have a foreign order recognized also in connection with real property. But this has not yet been tested so it remains to be seen.

How We Can Help

If you a guardian appointed in a province other than Ontario or in another country and you want to have your order recognized in Ontario, contact us.