What is the standard of correctness of a motion judge’s decision not to interfere with a discretionary order?

It was agreed by the parties that the motion judge’s decision is to be reviewed on the standard of correctness. Although the factual context of this case required an exercise of discretion, it was established in The Beaverbrook Canadian Foundation v. The Beaverbrook Art Gallery, 2006 NBCA 75, 302 N.B.R. (2d) 161, that a discretionary order may be interfered with on appeal if, and only if, it is founded upon: 1. an error of law; 2. an error in the application of the governing principles; or 3. a palpable and overriding error in the assessment of the evidence. V. Analysis