What is the test for appellate courts dealing with a matter of periodic or lump sum support?

29 An appellate court dealing with an issue of support, whether it be periodic or lump sum, should do so in the light of the directive provided by L’Heureux-Dubé J. in Hickey v. Hickey, 1999 CanLII 691 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 518 (at para. 10): 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.