What is the case law on non-pecuniary damages in medical malpractice cases?

A very similar situation occurred in Gabbard v. Hung, [1999] B.C.J. No. 1907. Koenigsberg J., in addressing non-pecuniary damages, wrote the following in para. 26: . . . In my view, it is very difficult to compare cases. However, the factor which is most compelling for consideration of an award for non-pecuniary damages is the fact that the plaintiff has suffered more than she otherwise might have and longer because she has continued to work at her career as if, more or less, she is not debilitated. It is clear that although her work cannot really be said to define her, for the better part of seven years she has performed well at her work, but most of the joy in doing so has been fleeting because of the considerable discomfort she endures. It has also been at the sacrifice of most all of the other important parts of her life. She has made choices throughout her life which reflect a need to have considerable balance and variety of activities while concentrating on developing her intellectual skills. Her marriage and any semblance of the hoped and planned for life with her husband has suffered greatly as a result of the significant limitations on her personal resources because of her injuries. The other aspects of her life have suffered as well particularly general social activities with family and friends. Most of us tend to think of these aspects of life as the measure of our quality of life.