Canada, the United States and Mexico offer a very interesting microcosm. On one side these three countries have strong economic, commercial and cultural ties with each other, but on the other hand there are significant and contrasting differences among each one of them. Differences in paradigms, approach, concepts, structures, procedures, et cetera While Canada is a Constitutional Monarchy with a Parliamentarian form of government, the U.S. and Mexico are Republics with a Presidential system. These three countries are known to be federal States, but their actual practice of federalism is very different in each one of them Furthermore, while Mexico's legal system belongs to the Romano-Germanic Tradition; most of the U.S. and Canada belong to the tradition of the Common Law. And yet there is even more, at different levels Puerto Rico and Louisiana in the United States, as well as Quebec in Canada are rooted in the Romano-Germanic Tradition. Accordingly, the Common Law and the Romano-Germanic traditions have to coexist harmoniously in the interaction that the domestic systems of Puerto Rico, Louisiana and Quebec have with the federal sphere of their respective counties This is the legal context in which our three countries have to coexist, interact and work together, and I think that these goals may only be achieved successfully if we understand and respect our respective legal identities in terms of that which is unique to each other, in terms of that which is different in each other, in terms of the goals that we do not have in common, in terms of the common goals that we have in common, in terms of that which we may want to achieve together, and also in terms of that what we can and should learn from each other Still, I truly believe that there are many important lessons that Mexico and world have to learn from these functional coexistences. At least in Canada this situation has driven to produce important developments in that what today is known as the Canadian Bijuralism. And even more, in my opinion---without having conscience of it---Canadians are developing the model that will frame supra-national law and global legal interaction in the twenty-first century In this sense, it would be ideal---and even desirable---to count with a broader and comprehensive view of the interaction between globalization the Law, as well as its actual effects and implications, but my goal is rather monographic This work aims to discuss one specific issue, the correlation between the assumption of personal jurisdiction by the issuing court over non-resident defendants (when the defendant has not appeared before the court, has challenged its jurisdiction or has not expressly submitted to such jurisdiction) and the enforcement of foreign judgments in the three countries of the North American subcontinent, namely Canada, the United States and Mexico
