Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly dismissed the complaint on the ground that the forum selection clause contained in the subject insurance policy provided that any action arising from the terms and conditions of the policy shall be instituted and litigated in the courts of the State of Colorado. Under New York law, forum selection clauses are prima facie valid ( see, Brooke Group v. JCH Syndicate 488, 87 N.Y.2d 530, 534; Micro Balanced Prods. Corp. v. Hlavin Indus., 238 A.D.2d 284, 285; British W. Indies Guar. Trust Co. v. Banque Internationale A Luxembourg, 172 A.D.2d 234). "Forum selection clauses are enforced because they provide certainty and predictability in the resolution of disputes" ( Brooke Group v. JCH Syndicate 488, supra, at 534). Here, the plaintiffs failed to show either that enforcement of the clause would be unreasonable, unjust, or would contravene public policy, or that the clause is invalid because of fraud or overreaching ( see, National Union Fire Ins. Co. v. Williams, 223 A.D.2d 395, 398; Hirschman v. National Textbook Co., 184 A.D.2d 494, 495; British W. Indies Guar. Trust Co. v. Banque Internationale A Luxembourg, supra; Di Ruocco v. Flamingo Beach Hotel Casino, 163 A.D.2d 270, 271-272).