What is the test for opposing confirmation of a report on a reference?

On a motion to oppose confirmation of a report on a reference, the results should not be interfered with unless there has been an error in principle, an absence or excess of jurisdiction, or some patent misapprehension of the evidence. Unless it seems unsatisfactory on all of the evidence, the award should not be disturbed. This approach was confirmed in the decision in Jordan v. McKenzie, [1987] O.J. No. 1193, in which the court stated: I think I ought not to interfere with the result unless there has been some error in principle demonstrated by the Master’s reasons, some absence or excess of jurisdiction, or some patent misapprehension of the evidence. I am further of the view that the award should not be disturbed unless it appears to be unsatisfactory on all of the evidence.