Is there a presumption that badges of fraud constitute a presumption of intent to defraud, defeat or delay creditors?

Ontario, Canada

The following excerpt is from Ernst & Young Inc. v. Aquino, 2021 ONSC 527 (CanLII):

The existence of badges of fraud creates a rebuttable presumption of the intention to defraud, defeat or delay creditors. The onus then shifts to those defending the fraud to adduce evidence to show the absence of fraudulent intent: Purcaru v. Seliverstova, 2015 ONSC 6679, 69 R.F.L. (7th) 388 at para. 57.

Other Questions

What is the test for evidence of intent to defeat, hinder or delay creditors? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a conveyance was executed with intent to delay or defeat creditors? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for proving intent to defeat or delay creditors? (Ontario, Canada)
If there was an intention to defeat creditors at the time of the conveyance, does that matter to present or future creditors? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the intention of a debtor making a disposition that is intended to defeat, hinder or delay his creditors? (Ontario, Canada)
Does the pleading of equitable fraud constitute unconscionable or equitable fraud? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the effect of the legislation that declares an instrument that sought to be impeached void as against creditors if made with intent to give preference to creditors? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there any potential hardship to the payor if the delay was caused by the delay due to the failure of the claimant's lawyer? (Ontario, Canada)
Does the failure to serve a notice of motion to set aside a dismissal order constitute a two year delay? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there a case in which a payor failed to respond to being served with a notice of intent to vary a child support order? (Ontario, Canada)

There are no other similar questions at this time.