This Ontario lawyers’ guide to pain and suffering compensation covers current award ranges and factors to consider when computing for damages
Pain is often described as something that cannot be quantified. In law, however, courts regularly assign a dollar figure to it through pain and suffering compensation in civil suits.
In this article, we will discuss the current state of pain and suffering compensation under Canadian and Ontario law. While this guide is written for Ontario lawyers, plaintiffs considering a pain and suffering claim will also find it useful.
Here are the cases where pain and suffering compensation, also called general damages or non-pecuniary damages, can be claimed by a plaintiff in Canada:
A plaintiff can sue primarily for pain and suffering or include it alongside other damages where applicable.
For instance, this video shows the damages that can be claimed in a slip-and-fall case in Canada, aside from pain and suffering compensation:
Learn more about claiming damages for your clients at our upcoming conferences. Visit our Events page for details.
Whatever the case may be, there are important elements that lawyers need to look at when claiming pain and suffering compensation for their clients:
These components can guide lawyers in calculating the amount to be claimed and developing strategies toward a favourable settlement or court award.
Whether preparing for settlement or filing a damages claim in court, there are several ways to calculate a plaintiff's pain and suffering compensation:
However, there's no fixed rule on how to calculate a specific amount. As such, the law provides general standards to guide plaintiffs and their lawyers when claiming damages.
The amount of non‑pecuniary compensation is also subject to the cap set by the Supreme Court of Canada and deductibles under Ontario law. We discuss both below.
Insurance companies use a fixed daily amount, usually the plaintiff's daily wage, multiplied by the number of days the plaintiff is expected to suffer the injury's effects. This can be used regardless of whether the case involves a short-term or a long-term disability.
The per diem method is often used alongside the multiplier method, where the total special damages are multiplied by a factor of 1.5, 2, or higher. The multiplier method also depends on several factors, including:
These methods help lawyers compute pain and suffering compensation and anticipate how insurers will approach the same calculation.
Another effective way to compute general damages is to compare the plaintiff's case with a past, similar case where damages were awarded. This precedent is then applied to the facts at hand to arrive at an amount on a sound legal basis.
This helps ensure the court and opposing party will accept the proposed amount, since precedents carry weight in cases with nearly identical facts.
Here are some examples of pain and suffering compensation awarded by Ontario courts in the recent years:
Tracking notable court decisions, especially unusual ones, helps both plaintiffs and lawyers when claiming similar damages.
Here's a video explaining how damages are calculated in a case for sexual abuse or violence in Ontario:
Visit our Features page for more insights from Ontario's legal experts to support your practice.
General damages in Canada are subject to a cap imposed by the Supreme Court, with limited exceptions. The original cap was set at $100,000, but it is adjusted annually for inflation. As of early 2026, this limit stands at around $470,000.
Provincial laws may also limit the general damages that a plaintiff can claim, in addition to the Supreme Court cap. Ontario has two laws with their own rules on deductibles and monetary threshold: the Insurance Act and the FLA.
In Ontario, claims for non‑pecuniary loss in automobile accidents are subject to the statutory deductible of the Insurance Act. The goal of these deductibles is to discourage lawsuits claiming only moderate or small amounts.
However, the deductibles under Ontario's Insurance Act and FLA have their own exceptions:
The deductible and monetary thresholds increase every year. In 2026, both increase by 2.4 percent, with the following amounts:
| Monetary thresholds | Deductibles | |
|---|---|---|
| Pain and suffering compensation | $159,708.71 | $47,913.01 |
| FLA's loss of guidance, care, and companionship | $79,853.70 | $23,956.52 |
Common law has set out several factors that lawyers can consider when computing the pain and suffering compensation for their clients:
Other factors may also work the other way around. Here are some factors that can lessen both the special and general damages:
When applied, these factors demonstrate that the plaintiff is proposing a fair and grounded amount, which strengthens the likelihood that the other party will accept it.
Pain and suffering compensation is exempt from tax in Canada. This exemption applies whether the plaintiff receives the compensation as a lump sum or in structured payments.
However, other components of the damages may be taxed, such as:
Structuring what to claim, and understanding the tax treatment of each component, is an important part of building a damages claim.
With the right use of precedents and legal factors, lawyers can build a well-supported claim for the pain and suffering their clients have experienced. For more complex cases, consulting a personal injury specialist can help ensure every compensable loss is properly documented and claimed.
Bookmark our Personal Injury practice area page for more news and updates for legal professionals in Ontario, including guides on computing pain and suffering compensation.
Quick answers to the most common questions about pain and suffering compensation in Canada.
Pain and suffering compensation — formally known as non-pecuniary general damages — refers to the monetary award given to an injured person for the physical pain, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, and reduced quality of life caused by another party's negligence. Unlike special damages (which cover quantifiable losses such as medical bills and lost income), non-pecuniary damages address the more subjective, intangible harms a plaintiff experiences.
Yes. The Supreme Court of Canada established a cap on non-pecuniary general damages in its landmark 1978 trilogy of cases — Andrews v. Grand & Toy Alberta Ltd., Arnold v. Teno, and Thornton v. School District No. 57. The court set the ceiling at $100,000 (in 1978 dollars), reasoning that there is no rational way to fully monetize human suffering and that consistency across awards is in the public interest.
Adjusted for inflation, that cap sits at roughly $430,000–$450,000 in today's dollars and applies to the most catastrophic cases. Less severe injuries attract proportionally lower awards.
Courts take a functional approach when assessing non-pecuniary damages. Rather than attempting to place a price on pain itself, judges ask: what amount of money would reasonably allow the plaintiff to access substituted pleasures or experiences that partially offset the loss of enjoyment they have suffered? Key factors considered include:
The cap established by the 1978 trilogy has remained largely intact as a matter of principle, though it has faced ongoing criticism from plaintiffs' lawyers who argue it has not kept pace with modern understandings of serious injury and the true cost of diminished quality of life.
Courts have, on occasion, pushed the boundaries of the cap in cases involving catastrophic and permanent injuries, but no binding Supreme Court decision has formally revised the framework. The conversation around whether the cap remains fair and contemporary continues to be an active area of debate in Canadian personal injury litigation.
Yes, significantly. Several Canadian provinces have introduced statutory deductibles and threshold requirements in automobile accident claims that can reduce or even eliminate a plaintiff's ability to recover non-pecuniary damages. For example:
These restrictions reflect a policy choice to manage insurance costs, but critics argue they unfairly limit access to justice for genuinely injured claimants.
Awards at or near the upper range of the cap are generally reserved for the most catastrophic injuries — those that permanently and profoundly alter every aspect of a plaintiff's life. Examples include:
Soft-tissue injuries, while painful, tend to attract more modest awards, particularly where there is evidence of recovery or where the long-term prognosis is favourable.
Yes. Non-pecuniary general damages are available across a wide range of personal injury actions in Canada, including:
The statutory deductibles and threshold rules that apply in automobile cases generally do not apply to these other categories of claims, which means plaintiffs may have broader access to full non-pecuniary awards outside the motor vehicle context.
