Where the consideration is inadequate or nominal, a creditor need only show that the transferor intended to delay, hinder or defraud the creditor (or other) of his or her remedies. Where on the other hand, valuable consideration has passed, the creditor must also show that the transferee actively participated in the fraud. Where valuable consideration has passed, then the focus is not on the sufficiency of that consideration, but on the intentions of both parties to the transaction: Chan v. Gresham, 2002 BCCA 474 at paras. 20, 21. Fraudulent conveyance of Salisbury Avenue property
"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.