(1) A party contesting the validity or enforcement of a registered support order or seeking to vacate the registration has the burden of proving one or more of the following defenses:
(a) That the issuing tribunal lacked personal jurisdiction over the contesting party.
(b) That the order was obtained by fraud.
(c) That the order has been vacated, suspended or modified by a later order.
(d) That the issuing tribunal has stayed the order pending appeal.
(e) That there is a defense under the law of this state to the remedy sought.
(f) That full or partial payment has been made.
(g) That the statute of limitations under s. 769.604 (2) precludes enforcement of some or all of the arrearages.
(h) That the alleged controlling order is not the controlling order.
(2) If a party presents evidence establishing a full or partial defense under sub. (1), a tribunal may stay enforcement of a registered support order, continue the proceeding to permit production of additional relevant evidence, or issue other appropriate orders. An uncontested portion of the registered support order may be enforced by all remedies available under the law of this state.
(3) If the contesting party does not establish a defense under sub.
(1) to the validity or enforcement of a registered support order, the registering tribunal shall issue an order confirming the order.