Case Update (16 Sept 2025): Habibzai v. Jafarova; Azerbaijan divorce entitled to Practical Recognition
The parties were spouses married in Azerbaijan in July 1991. They had two children, both now adults, and in 2009, they immigrated to the United States. On July 29, 2015, an Azerbaijani court issued a judgment dissolving their marriage. At the time of this dissolution, neither spouse was domiciled in Azerbaijan. Neither party appeared in court in Azerbaijan. The Defendant, however, traveled to Azerbaijan and hired attorneys to conclude that foreign divorce. Plaintiff now seeks a Connecticut divorce, and the Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the Connecticut suit, arguing that the Azerbaijani divorce judgment should be recognized in Connecticut, thereby precluding the Connecticut court’s recognition of it. Apparently, at first, the Defendant argued that it should be recognized as a matter of comity. However, Connecticut caselaw requires that at least one spouse had been domiciled in the foreign jurisdiction to recognize the foreign divorce as a matter of comity. Since neither spouse was domiciled in Azerbaijan at the time of the divorce proceedings, the Defendant argued that it should be recognized as a matter of practical recognition. In other words, the Plaintiff is now taking a position inconsistent with their past conduct, the parties relied upon the divorce, and invalidating the foreign divorce would now upset relationships or expectations.
In this case, the Connecticut court found that the parties agreed that Defendant would obtain the Azerbaijani divorce, that the Plaintiff knew that the proceedings were initiated there, and was aware of the entry of the final Azerbaijani divorce. Further, in the year following the divorce, the parties filed their taxes as single individuals, and in 2020, Plaintiff married a new spouse, and used the Azerbaijani divorce to allow the new spouse to immigrate to the USA. The Plaintitff also signed a real estate conveyance form that listed the Azerbaijani divorce as the basis for a tax exemption. The Plaintiff now contests the validity of that divorce 9 years later.
The court concluded that the Plaintiff should be estopped from contesting the validity of the Azerbaijani divorce, and therefore, it should be recognized as a matter of practical recognition in Connecticut. The Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss was granted.
