Is independent corroborative evidence required in a case involving a transaction between two near relatives?

In cases of non arm’s length transactions, independent corroborative evidence is strongly recommended but not required if the defendants’ evidence is found to be credible. In Koop v. Smith (1915), 1915 CanLII 26 (SCC), 51 S.C.R. 554, Duff J. discussed the need for corroborative evidence in a case involving a transaction between two near relatives for no consideration. Duff J., at p.559 stated as follows: I think the true rule is that suspicious circumstances coupled with relationship make a case of res ipsa loquitur which the tribunal of fact may and will generally treat as a sufficient prima facie case, but that it is not strictly in law bound to do so; and that the question of the necessity of corroboration is strictly a question of fact. Having examined the evidence carefully I am satisfied that the learned trial judge was entitled to take the course he did take and not only that the evidence, as I read it in the record, casts the burden of explanation upon the respondent, but that the testimony given by her brother ought not in the circumstances to be accepted as establishing either the actual existence of the debt or of the bona fides of the transaction.