What is the effect of duration of marriage on reapportionment of a spouse's share?

Since they were married for over 22 years, it is fair to characterize the Tezcan's marriage as a "long marriage". Although the case-law does not provide precise guidance with respect to what effect this should have on reapportionment, it seems that duration of marriage is a "negative" factor. This means that it is most often used in cases of short marriages to reduce the claimant's percentage, rather than as a reason to increase the claimant's percentage when the marriage is long. The following passage from Mr. Justice Locke's July 2, 1985 decision in Elsom v. Elsom, 33 A.C.W.S. 335, [1985] W.D.F.L. 1578, [1985] B.C.W.L.D. 2710 (S.C.), reflects this view of the "duration of marriage" factor: These parties lived together for nine years before separation and neither of them were youngsters. It is not obvious that the marriage is so short that one must immediately come to the conclusion that a 50% division is unfair. But as I follow the train of thought in the authorities, in the case of a long marriage with a continuing contribution by the wife, even if only indirect, it becomes more difficult to displace the 50% rule without something more.