What is the standard of review applied by the Court of Appeal to overturn a wife's award for spousal support?

It is important to state at the outset that it is not this court's function to retry the case as several of the appellant’s arguments suggest should be done. This court is not to overturn support orders unless the reasons disclose an error in principle, a significant misapprehension of the evidence or unless the award is clearly wrong. This standard of review is set out in Hickey v. Hickey, 1999 CanLII 691 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 518 at 525: When family law legislation gives judges the power to decide on support obligations based on certain objectives, values, factors, and criteria, determining whether support will be awarded or varied, and if so, the amount of the order, involves the exercise of considerable discretion by trial judges. They must balance the objectives and factors set out in the Divorce Act or in provincial support statutes with an appreciation of the particular facts of the case. It is a difficult but important determination, which is critical to the lives of the parties and to their children. Because of its fact‑based and discretionary nature, trial judges must be given considerable deference by appellate courts when such decisions are reviewed. Our Court has often emphasized the rule that appeal courts should not overturn support orders unless the reasons disclose an error in principle, a significant misapprehension of the evidence, or unless the award is clearly wrong. (Authorities deleted) There are strong reasons for the significant deference that must be given to trial judges in relation to support orders. This standard of appellate review recognizes that the discretion involved in making a support order is best exercised by the judge who has heard the parties directly. It avoids giving parties an incentive to appeal judgments and incur added expenses in the hope that the appeal court will have a different appreciation of the relevant factors and evidence. This approach promotes finality in family law litigation and recognizes the importance of the appreciation of the facts by the trial judge. Though an appeal court must intervene when there is a material error, a serious misapprehension of the evidence, or an error in law, it is not entitled to overturn a support order simply because it would have made a different decision or balanced the factors differently. Entitlement to Spousal Support