What is the evidentiary onus of proof in a motion to set aside a restraining order?

In Baril v. Obelnicki, 2007 MBCA 40, the court discussed the evidentiary onus of proof resting on the person wishing to set aside the protection order: ¶127 … Thus, the respondent must demonstrate, on a balance of probabilities, that it is just or equitable that the judge set aside the order. He may show among other possibilities that, on a balance of probabilities, full disclosure was not made or that the restraints on his liberty are unnecessary or too restrictive or that the stalking will not continue or based on the weight of the evidence at the review hearing the order should be set aside. In this way, the legislative regime is preserved while the legislative purpose is accomplished.