What are the factors appropriate for consideration in determining whether to stay a motion for a stay of judgment in a domestic proceeding?

Many of those factors appropriate for consideration [authorities omitted] are summarized by McGarry J. in Dunlop v. Connecticut College, (1996) 50 C.P.C. (3d) 109 at p. 117: (i) the location of the majority of the parties and key evidence; (ii) the location of key witnesses; (iii) the presence of a clause specifying applicable law; (iv) the presence of a clause according exclusive jurisdiction; (v) the avoidance of multiplicity of proceedings; (vi)(f) the applicable law and its weight compared with the factual questions to be decided; (vii)(g) geographical factors suggesting the natural forum; (viii) whether certain witnesses or parties will have to travel a considerable distance in any event; … (ix) the relative ability of the plaintiff to seek immediate execution after judgment in the competing jurisdictions (x) the relative ability of the plaintiff to seek immediate execution after judgment in the competing jurisdictions (xi) (xii) generally, whether a stay of the proceedings in the domestic forum would deprive the plaintiff of a legitimate personal or juridical advantage which would be available to him or her if he or she was permitted to invoke the jurisdiction of the domestic court.