Very often, we have to face the slippery reality of the application of marriage contracts drawn up by couples during marriage in Italy (in the form of a separation of property) which can be invoked in the American courts or invoked ex converso. Some general and simple information can be given here about the functioning of the two systems: of course, the advice of a local lawyer remains indispensable, both in Italy and in America. Under the current bill, if the marital agreements provide for clauses relating to children, the authorisation of the competent Court of Justice would in any case be mandatory, so that the Court of Justice could verify that the children are properly protected by those previous decisions already agreed by the spouses. Agreements can only be valid if they are carried out by a public act before a notary and two witnesses, in order to ensure that the intentions of both spouses are given in a state of freedom and awareness. The difficulties of refusing the validity of such contracts are mitigated by the availability of the Separazione dei beni agreement, which can be implemented before the marriage breakdown. This can only cover assets acquired by both parties during the marriage. Purpose of marriage contracts in force abroad Although the spouses are not in a position to enter into a conjugal agreement in Italy and the Italian Court also does not maintain a foreign marriage agreement in the event of a divorce, the spouses can protect the wealthy property by choosing the separation of the property. Since this is not a legal property order for delay, spouses who wish to do so must do so in writing in a public deed before a notary and two witnesses. This must be taken into account if Italy is a jurisdiction relevant to you and your family. Marriage contracts in Canada are subject to provincial legislation.
Every province and territory in Canada recognizes marital agreements. For example, in Ontario, marriage contracts are called marriage contracts and are recognized by Section 52 of the Family Law Act.  Some federal statutes apply to conditions that may be contained in a premarital contract. The Withdrawal Equity Act (REA) of 1984, signed on August 23, 1984 by President Ronald Reagan, reconciled confusion over whether ERISA anticipated state divorce laws, thereby preventing pension plans from complying with court injunctions granting a spouse a portion of the worker`s pension in a divorce decree.  A matrimonial agreement may include exceptions whererightly agrees to revoke all rights against the other`s pension benefits arising from state and federal marriage laws, as in the context of the REA. The canonical law: the letter and the spirit, a commentary on canon law, states that the condition can be defined as „a provision by which an agreement is subject to verification or the fulfillment of a circumstance or event that is not yet certain.“ He added: „Any future condition related to conjugal consent invalidates the marriage.“ For example, a marriage would not be valid if the parties prescribed that they must have children, or they had the right to divorce and remarry. [Citation required] In the past, in England and Wales, marital agreements had not been considered legally applicable in England and Wales for public policy reasons.