Does a continuing relationship raise the presumption of undue influence in a transaction that benefits the person in whom the influence rests?

I conclude that a continuing relationship in the nature of a trust will of itself raise a presumption of undue influence in a transaction that benefits the person in whom the influence rests. In other cases the surrounding circumstances may afford proof of a relationship of confidence between the parties in respect of an impugned transaction, of which advantage was taken in a way that the court will not countenance. Indeed, the circumstances may be such that the court will presume undue influence from them and require proof of its non-existence in the resulting advantage that was gained. As said in Allcard v. Skinner, there may be some overlap between the two classes, which would have a bearing on the burden of proof. In all such cases considerations of the personal character and situation of each party vis-a-vis the other are taken into account.