The recent authorities emphasize that an award under this head is an assessment of the lost asset, not an arithmetical calculation of projected earnings, deductions for contingencies, and so on: Rowe v. Bobell Express Ltd. (2005), 39 B.C.L.R. (4th) 185, 2005 BCCA 141. The distinction for hourly wage earners appears esoteric, and the practical difference in result of the two approaches may be negligible; see e.g. M. B. v. British Columbia, [2003] 2 S.C.R. 477, 2003 SCC 53 at para. 50, McLachlin C.J.C.: [T]he value of a particular plaintiff's capacity to earn is equivalent to the value of the earnings that she or he would have received over time, had the tort not been committed.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.