When is an offer not an offer that ought reasonably have been accepted?

I conclude that the offer of June 14, 2015, was not an offer that ought reasonably have been accepted due to the uncertainty in the potential return to the parties, especially in respect of the seven unsold lots. The claimant would not have been in a position to assess what her portion of the sale proceeds would be and most likely there would not have been an equal apportionment (compare Boe v. Boe, 2013 BCSC 984 at para. 31). Moreover, choosing lots would have been a gamble for the claimant, who would have been less qualified than the respondent to be able to assess the likelihood of sale prices and dates than would the respondent.