The central issue in this appeal is whether the trial judge erred in applying the law relating to the burden of explanation in this fraudulent conveyance action. He correctly set out that law as stated in Koop v. Smith, [1915] 1 S.C.R. 533, which requires a sufficient showing both of the closeness of the relationship between the parties to the challenged conveyance and the suspiciousness of the circumstances surrounding the conveyance before the burden of explanation arises.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.