Is there a conflict of evidence between the debtor and creditor?

Here there is no conflict of evidence; both debtor and creditor swearing that they had no idea of insolvency. Any doubt there may be is raised by the statement, which it is said should have led the creditor to a different conclusion. Even if there had been a conflict of evidence “the finding of the primary judge” as laid down in Grassett v. Carter, 1884 CanLII 5 (SCC), 10 S.C.R. 105, at p. 125, “is to be regarded as decisive, and should not be overturned in appeal by judges who have not had the advantage, as the judge at the trial had, of seeing the witnesses and observing their demeanour under examination.”

If the debtor had sworn that he was insolvent to the knowledge of his creditor, and the learned Judge had, nevertheless, adopted the creditor’s denial, the decision, according to Grassett v. Carter, should be decisive. Is more weight then to be given to a statement which might, and to some minds would, have fixed the creditor with the knowledge of his debtor’s circumstances than the evidence of the debtor?