What factors apply to an equalization of the assets of the respondent in his personal and corporate real estate?

[31] Bearing in mind the comment of Appeal Justice McKinlay that courts have never shied from making assessments were the evidence is “less than precise”, and applying the three rules which she laid out at page 70 [C.P.C.] in Sengmueller v. Sengmueller, supra, the following factors apply in this case: (a) It is fairly clear that some of the corporate real properties may have to be sold to effect an equalization. That was so as of valuation date as well as today. (b) There is no evidence of the present value of the respondent’s personal and corporate real estate’s properties. Thus, there is no certainty as to which assets must be liquidated. (c) Since valuation date, the respondent has been neglecting his business, possibly contributing to a depreciation of his corporate net worth and increasing the possibility that more of his assets may have to be liquidated.