What is the test for a plaintiff in a motor vehicle accident to claim damages for personal injury?

The Court stated (at para. 27): It is the fundamental principle of tort law in this country that an injured plaintiff should be neither over nor under, but fully compensated by way of damages for injury sustained by the negligence of others. McLachlin J. writing for the majority in Ratych v. Bloomer, 1990 CanLII 97 (SCC), [1990] 1 S.C.R. 940 at paragraph 94 put it this way: The general principles underlying our system of damages suggest that a plaintiff should receive full and fair compensation, calculated to place him or her in the same position as he or she would have been had the tort not been committed, in so far as this can be achieved by a monetary award. This principle suggests that in calculating damages under the pecuniary heads, the measure of damages should be the plaintiff’s actual loss. It is implicit in this that the plaintiff should not recover unless he can demonstrate a loss, and then only to the extent of that loss. Double recovery violates this principle.