What are the principle errors in a judge's exercise of discretion in a family property dispute?

It is worthwhile noting that the two principle errors alleged by the appellant challenge the judge’s exercise of discretion: her decision to use the date of trial to value the family residence; and her decision to divide the family property equally. Such discretionary decisions are central to the task a judge must perform in resolving family property disputes and are always afforded considerable deference. To the extent that the appellant challenges the findings of fact, this Court can intervene only where there is a palpable and overriding error affecting the judge’s assessment of the facts: Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33 at para. 10.