What are the consequences of errors in a motion judge’s spousal support analysis?

The errors in the motion judge’s spousal support analysis, described above, constitute errors in principle and reflect a significant misapprehension of some of the key evidence. Accordingly, they displace the usual deference to be accorded by a reviewing court to a motion judge’s discretionary spousal support ruling: Hickey v. Hickey, 1999 CanLII 691 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 518, at para. 11. The issues, therefore, are what spousal support should be paid by the Husband to the Wife, if any, and for how long. In my view, the record before this court is sufficient to permit a determination of these issues, without the need to order a new trial with attendant delay and additional costs. I did not understand the parties to suggest otherwise.