“A person claiming that monies advanced by a family member is a loan has the onus of proving that it is a loan.
In Turner v. Hawkins, 2002 CanLII 2820 (ON SC), [2002] O.J. No. 4099 (S.C.J.). Kent J. at para. 17, stated that:
[T]he law provides where funds are advanced by family members to a daughter and son-in-law, there is a rebuttable presumption that the advance is a gift. If there is acceptable evidence which establishes on a balance of probabilities that the intent of the parties at the time of advancement was other than to give or receive a gift, then the advance may be found to be a loan. Such evidence is best if it is documentary, next best if it is independent and of the least assistance to the court if it is only the oral evidence of the involved and interested parties testifying on the basis of their recollection. This is particularly so, if anything in the evidence of the parties reflects unfavourable upon their credibility or reliability.”