Appellate Division Confirms Law When Divorce Is Filed In Another Country

GENE VAN DEN ENDE v. CROFTON PHILIP REYNOLDS

Docket No. A-1565-24

Decided November 3, 2025

Submitted by New Jersey Divorce Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark

In a recent published decision the Appellate Division of New Jersey reviewed the law surrounding a situation in which a divorce, or at least a request made typically in a divorce such as equitable distribution, has been filed prior to the other spouse filing for divorce in New Jersey. The question before the Court was which country has jurisdiction?

In Ende v. Reynolds, Both parties were born in South Africa. On April 2, 2009, the parties entered into the Agreement in South Africa. The Agreement provided that in the event of a divorce, the parties’ marital estate would be divided using the accrual system provided in South African statutes. The Agreement has no provisions regarding child support and alimony. There is no choice of forum stated in the Agreement. The parties were married two days later on April 4, 2009, in South Africa. The parties have a child who was born in South Africa in March 2015.

In August 2017, plaintiff claims the parties agreed to relocate to New Jersey when she was offered a job. After plaintiff accepted the job, she alleges defendant told her he could not move for eighteen months without having to repay his sign-on bonus. Therefore, plaintiff and the child moved to New Jersey, with the plan that defendant would join them after he completed his employment duties. According to plaintiff, defendant engaged in extramarital affairs in South Africa and never relocated to New Jersey.

On November 30, 2021, plaintiff filed a divorce complaint in the Morris County Family Part alleging irreconcilable differences. In her complaint, plaintiff sought custody of the child, child support, life insurance coverage, alimony, and equitable distribution of the parties’ assets, including those located in South Africa, the United Kingdom, Europe, and offshore accounts. The complaint acknowledged the parties entered into the Agreement in South Africa but alleged it was invalid.

On September 23, 2022, defendant filed an answer and counterclaim for divorce. Defendant resides in Johannesburg, South Africa, but agreed that New Jersey had jurisdiction over the dissolution of the marriage, custody issues, child support, and alimony. However, defendant asserted that South Africa—not New Jersey—had jurisdiction over the distribution of marital property pursuant to the Agreement.

The trial Court found that South Africa had jurisdiction over the equitable distribution claims. Plaintiff filed an appeal and the Appellate Division found that the trial judge did not adequately fulfill the test required under the New Jersey first-to-file law.  Specifically, the Judge must have found (1) there is an earlier-filed action in another jurisdiction; (2) the prior action involves “substantially the same parties, the same claims, and the same legal issues” as the second-filed action; and (3) the plaintiff in the second-filed action “will have the opportunity for adequate relief” in the first action. If the party seeking relief “satisfies those prerequisites, then the burden shifts to the other party, [who] must demonstrate special equities” that weigh in favor of retention of jurisdiction by the court in the second-filed action.  This is done through a plenary hearing (trial).

If you or someone you know has a spouse outside New Jersey or the country and you are seeking divorce, contact the experience attorneys at Hark & Hark today.  Failure to take action could result in your rights being compromised by the other party filing pertinent actions before you do.

In recognition of these trying financial times, we are reducing fees and working with clients to come up with manageable payment plans. Initial consultation is always free and we are available remotely.

We offer payment plan options to clients financially incapable of providing full payment upfront. If you are facing domestic violence charges similar to this circumstance, please call us to discuss the matter. At Hark & Hark, we represent clients for any case in any county in New Jersey including Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Essex, Gloucester, Mercer, Ocean, and Salem counties. We represent clients in all towns in New Jersey, including Bass River, Beverly, Bordentown City, Bordentown Township, Burlington City, Burlington Township, Chesterfield, Cinnaminson, Delanco, Delran, Eastampton, Edgewater Park, Evesham, Fieldsboro, Florence, Hainesport, Lumberton, Mansfield, Maple Shade, Medford Lakes, Medford Township, Moorestown, Mount Holly, Mount Laurel, New Hanover, North Hanover, Palmyra, Pemberton Borough, Pemberton Township, Riverside, Riverton, Shamong, Southampton, Springfield, Tabernacle, Washington Township, Westampton, Willingboro, Woodland Township, and Wrightstown.