What is the test for estimating the range of general damages for an injured plaintiff in a motor vehicle accident?

The assessment is an exercise of judgment, not a mathematical calculation. Ultimately, the court must base its decision on what is reasonable in all of the circumstances. Even in circumstances where employment data and calculations appear to show no reduction or even an increase in income following an injury, where a plaintiff continues to suffer to some degree from the effects of an accident which have an impact on the plaintiff’s work, there is an impairment of earning capacity. The proper question under this head of damages is not simply whether a plaintiff will suffer an actual wage loss, but rather whether there has been an impairment of the plaintiff’s income-earning capacity. This latter approach treats the ability to earn income as a capital asset, and the issue is whether that asset has in any way been diminished by reason of the defendant’s negligence. See Willett v. Rose, 2017 BCSC 627, at para. 69. Projections, calculations and formulas are only useful to the extent that they help determine what is fair and reasonable.