Compiled from public legal sources regarding BC Family Maintenance Agency (formerly FMEP), child support duration, recognition of Chinese judgments, imputed income, and interjurisdictional issues. For educational and archival purposes only. Not legal advice.
根据公开法律资料整理，涉及BC家庭抚养执行机构（原FMEP）、抚养费期限、中国判决承认、推定收入及跨境问题。仅供教育与档案记录，不构成法律意见。
Disclaimer: This is general information based on publicly available sources as of 2026. Specific cases depend on facts and require qualified legal advice in the relevant jurisdiction.
免责声明：本页为截至2026年的公开资料一般性整理。具体案件取决于事实，需咨询有资质的当地律师。
The Family Maintenance Enforcement Program (FMEP) is now the BC Family Maintenance Agency (BCFMA). It is a free government program that monitors and enforces existing support orders and filed agreements. It does not set the amount of support. Enforcement tools include: wage attachment/garnishment, bank account seizure, liens on property, interception of tax refunds and certain federal benefits, suspension of BC driver's licence (typically after significant arrears), federal passport denial (under federal law after $3,000 or 3 months arrears), credit bureau reporting, and default hearings.
家庭抚养执行计划（FMEP）现称BC家庭抚养机构（BCFMA）。它是免费的政府项目，负责监督和执行已有的抚养令或已登记协议。它本身不决定抚养数额。执行手段包括：工资扣押、银行账户冻结、财产留置、拦截退税及部分联邦福利、暂停BC驾照（通常在欠款达到一定数额后）、联邦护照拒绝（联邦法规定欠款达3000加元或连续3个月后）、信用报告，以及缺席听证。
In British Columbia, the age of majority is 19. Child support generally continues until the child turns 19. However, it does not automatically end at 19. It may continue if the child remains dependent due to full-time post-secondary education, illness, disability, or other inability to become self-supporting. The recipient must usually provide updated information about the child's circumstances to BCFMA for continued collection after age 19. See Family Law Act and Divorce Act definitions of "child".
不列颠哥伦比亚省成年年龄为19岁。儿童抚养费一般持续到孩子满19岁。但满19岁后并不自动终止。如果孩子因全日制高等教育、疾病、残疾或其他无法自立的原因仍依赖父母，抚养义务可能继续。通常需向BCFMA更新孩子情况以继续收取。参见《家庭法》及《离婚法》中“子女”的定义。
Chinese judgments are not automatically enforceable in BC. Recognition requires a separate application to the BC Supreme Court. In Cao v. Chen, 2020 BCSC 735, the court recognized the Chinese divorce and spousal support but declined to recognize the child custody and child support portions (finding the child support order not final for Canadian recognition purposes). Chinese mediation agreements (民事调解书) have been treated as equivalent to judgments in some cases (e.g., Wei v. Li). Common law requirements include jurisdiction (real and substantial connection), finality, and absence of defences such as fraud, natural justice breach, or public policy.
中国判决在BC不会自动执行。需另行向BC最高法院申请承认。在Cao v. Chen（2020 BCSC 735）案中，法院承认了中国离婚判决和配偶抚养部分，但拒绝承认子女监护和抚养部分（认为抚养令对加拿大承认目的而言并非终局）。中国民事调解书在部分案件中被视为与判决等同（如Wei v. Li）。普通法要求包括管辖权（真实实质联系）、终局性，以及无欺诈、自然正义违背或公共政策抗辩。
Under section 19 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines, a court may impute income if a parent is intentionally under-employed or unemployed, unless required by the needs of a child or the parent's reasonable educational or health needs. Once a prima facie case of voluntary under-employment is shown, the burden shifts to the parent to justify the lower income. Disability or health limitations can be a valid exception if supported by evidence. Zero reported income does not automatically prevent imputation; courts look at capacity based on age, education, health, work history, and available work. Official records of disability benefits, income assistance, or medical evidence are relevant.
根据《联邦儿童抚养指南》第19条，如果父母故意就业不足或失业，法院可推定收入，除非是因子女需要或父母合理的教育/健康需求。一旦初步证明自愿就业不足，举证责任转向该父母证明较低收入的合理性。残疾或健康限制若有证据支持，可作为有效例外。申报零收入并不自动阻止推定；法院会根据年龄、教育、健康、工作史及可获得工作评估能力。残疾福利、收入援助或医疗证据的官方记录具有相关性。
BCFMA primarily enforces against payors who have income, assets, or presence in BC or reciprocal jurisdictions. The United States is a reciprocating jurisdiction under BC's Interjurisdictional Support Orders Act. Enforcement against a person residing solely in the US typically requires registration of the BC order in the relevant US state under UIFSA (Uniform Interstate Family Support Act) or equivalent processes. Massachusetts courts apply their own procedures and look at actual evidence rather than automatically adopting BC imputed figures. A Chinese mediation agreement's recognition remains a separate issue in both places.
BCFMA主要针对在BC或互惠法域有收入、资产或存在的付款人执行。美国根据BC《跨司法辖区抚养令法》属于互惠法域。对仅居住在美国的人执行，通常需根据UIFSA（统一州际家庭抚养法）或同等程序在相关美国州登记BC令。麻省法院适用自身程序，并审查实际证据，而非自动采用BC的推定数字。中国调解书的承认在两地仍是独立问题。
An oral claim that a Chinese court mediation agreement is "waste paper" does not invalidate it under Chinese law. To set aside a court-confirmed mediation, statutory procedures (revocation or retrial) with proof of grounds such as fraud or duress are required. In BC, the document has evidentiary weight but requires formal recognition proceedings to have direct enforcement effect. The strategic use of such language often reflects attempts to seek a fresh determination under local standards.
口头声称中国法院调解书是“废纸”，在中国法下不能使其失效。要撤销法院确认的调解，需启动法定程序（撤销或再审）并举证欺诈、胁迫等事由。在BC，该文件具有证据效力，但需正式承认程序才能产生直接执行力。此类说法的策略性使用，常反映寻求按本地标准重新核定的企图。
Facts: Chinese divorce judgment from Weifang Intermediate People's Court (2013). Parties later sought recognition in BC. The Chinese judgment addressed divorce, custody (split between parents), child support (each parent supporting the child in their custody), property in China, and denied spousal support to one party.
事实：山东省潍坊中院2013年离婚判决。后在BC寻求承认。中国判决处理了离婚、监护（子女分别由父母一方抚养）、抚养费（各自承担所抚养子女）、中国境内财产，并拒绝了一方配偶抚养请求。
Holding: BC Supreme Court recognized the Chinese divorce decree and the spousal support determination. It declined to recognize the custody and child support portions, finding the Chinese child support order was not "final and conclusive" for Canadian recognition purposes. The court held BC was the appropriate forum for further child-related issues. It noted a high risk of conflicting decisions if full recognition were granted, given significant differences between Chinese and Canadian/BC family law.
判决：BC最高法院承认了中国离婚判决及配偶抚养部分。拒绝承认监护与子女抚养部分，认为中国子女抚养令对加拿大承认目的而言并非“终局且确定”。法院认为BC是处理进一步子女相关问题的适当法院。并指出若完全承认，因中加/BC家庭法差异显著，存在高度冲突判决风险。
Facts: Chinese court issued a Civil Mediation Paper (民事调解书) in 2014 confirming a mediated settlement of a debt/guarantee claim. One defendant later resided in BC and owned property there. Plaintiff sought enforcement in BC Supreme Court.
事实：中国法院2014年出具民事调解书，确认债务/担保调解协议。一名被告后居住在BC并在当地拥有财产。原告向BC最高法院申请执行。
Holding: Trial court (Macintosh J.) enforced the Chinese mediation paper as a foreign judgment after finding: (a) Chinese court had jurisdiction (real and substantial connection); (b) the mediation paper was final and conclusive under Chinese law (no appeal available for consent-based mediation); (c) no defences of fraud, natural justice breach, or public policy applied (except interest rate was notionally severed to comply with Canadian Criminal Code criminal interest limit of 60%). Court of Appeal upheld the decision. This is a leading example of a Chinese court mediation agreement being treated as equivalent to a judgment for enforcement purposes in BC.
判决：初审法院（Macintosh法官）将中国调解书作为外国判决执行，认定：(a) 中国法院有管辖权（真实实质联系）；(b) 调解书在中国法下终局且确定（同意调解无上诉）；(c) 无欺诈、自然正义违背或公共政策抗辩（但利率被名义分割以符合加拿大《刑法》60%刑事利率上限）。上诉法院维持。此为BC将中国法院调解书视为等同判决并予以执行的重要先例。
Holding: BC Court of Appeal clarified the burden of proof under s. 19(1)(a) of the Federal Child Support Guidelines. Once the party seeking imputation establishes a prima facie case of intentional under-employment or unemployment (e.g., a sharp drop in income after voluntary resignation), the evidentiary burden shifts to the under-employed parent to prove that the lower income is required by a child's needs or the parent's reasonable educational or health needs. The trial judge's imputation of $325,000 (based on earnings history, skills, and capacity, while accounting for a desire to remain in Vancouver) was upheld.
判决：BC上诉法院澄清《联邦儿童抚养指南》第19(1)(a)条举证责任。一旦寻求推定的一方初步证明故意就业不足或失业（如自愿辞职后收入急剧下降），举证责任转向就业不足一方，证明较低收入是因子女需要或自身合理教育/健康需求。初审法官根据收入史、技能与能力（并考虑留在温哥华意愿）推定32.5万加元收入的决定被维持。