What is the difference between general contingencies and specific contingencies?

In Graham v. Rourke the Court of Appeal differentiated between general contingencies which are common to all members of the population and specific contingencies which arise from the plaintiff’s circumstances.[56] At page 636, Doherty J.A. wrote: The former type of contingency is not readily susceptible to evidentiary proof and may be considered in the absence of such evidence. However, where a trial judge directs his or her mind to the existence of these contingencies, the trial judge must remember that everyone’s life has “ups” as well as “downs”. A trial judge may, not must, adjust an award for future pecuniary loss to give effect to general contingencies but where the adjustment is premised only on general contingencies, it should be modest.