What is the test for damages for a plaintiff who was forced to continue paying for a car lease?

In presenting this claim, the plaintiff relies on the judgment of Selbie L.J.S.C., as he then was, in Sharma v. Andrews, [1989] B.C.J. No. 2037 (S.C.), where the learned judge said this: The plaintiff was paying money for the use of his car on a lease basis. The use of the vehicle was taken from him by the actions of the defendant. What better measure of his loss is there than the monies he was forced to continue paying without benefit of use and without gaining any advantage - an advantage, I would suggest, that he would have got if he had been buying the car and was simply continuing the payments. I do not think the car payments would have been a measure of damages but in my view lease or rent payments would be.