In Nishi v. Rascal Trucking Ltd., 2013 SCC 33, Rothstein J. held, at para. 41: Evidence that arises subsequent to a gratuitous transfer can be admissible to show the true intention of the transferor... However, it is the intention of the transferor at the time of the transfer that is determinative. The difficulty with subsequent evidence is that it may well be self-serving or the product of a change in intention on the part of the transferor.
"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.