Goodridge v Beadle

In *Goodridge v Beadle*, heard by Judge Wilson, the dispute concerned parenting and property matters arising from a de facto relationship of over 13 years, which involved farming operations.

The court was required to determine several legal issues, including whether to exclude the entirety of a witness's affidavit evidence when the deponent refused to continue with cross-examination, rendering a majority of her affidavit untested. The court also considered the principles relating to fraud, the certainty of contracts, what constitutes a sale "in the ordinary course of business" for security purposes, and the application of the rule in *Jones v Dunkel* concerning adverse inferences. The elements of a sham transaction were also relevant.

Judge Wilson, after an extensive review of authorities, determined that it was appropriate to exclude the whole of the witness's affidavit evidence due to the untested nature of the majority of its content. The court also found that while it was not necessary to specifically label impugned evidence as "fraud," particulars of the impugned conduct needed to be provided. Regarding security, the court noted that a sale "in the ordinary course of business" requires evidence of such a sale, which was absent on the facts.

The court directed the parties to bring in minutes of orders that give effect to these reasons within 21 days, by email. Otherwise, the further hearing of the proceeding was adjourned to a date to be fixed.