Per Lord Goff in The Texaco Melbourne  1 Lloyd’s Rep. 473 (HL) at 477-478:
First, it is necessary to ascertain whether there is an intention, to be derived from the terms of the contract, that damages for breach of contract should be awarded in any particular currency or currencies. In the absence of any such intention, ‘the damage should be calculated in the currency in which the loss was felt by the plaintif’f or ‘which most truly expresses his loss’.
Per Gloster J in Milan Nigeria Ltd v Angeliki B Maritime Company  EWHC 892 at para 63:
63. The currency in which a claimant feels its loss is a question of fact to be determined by the tribunal having regard to all the circumstances of the case before it: see The Texaco Melbourne, (supra) at pages 478-480. The decision-maker’s function is to identify "the currency which most justly expresses the loss that has been suffered by the claimants": The "Mosconici"  2 Lloyd’s Rep. 313, at page 316. Thus, factors which are important in one case may or may not be important in another, and caution must be taken not to elevate factual observations made in one case into statements of principle to be applied generally in other cases. In the passage relied upon by Mr. Karia in The Texaco Melbourne, Lord Goff was discussing the particular facts of the case before him. He was not attempting to lay down a principle of law applicable to all factual situations.