In civil law, the starting rule is simple: any damage entitles to compensation, and the compensation must be full and complete, unless the law provides otherwise. In matters concerning infringements of non-property rights, the Civil Code expressly allows the claim for compensation for the non-property damage caused, not only for measures to stop or remove the unlawful act.
In other words, moral damages are not an „amount of comfort,” but the monetary equivalent of an infringement on values such as dignity, honor, reputation, privacy, bodily integrity, or health.
When you can claim non-pecuniary damages
You can file such a claim when you have suffered an infringement of a non-property right and you can show that the unlawful act caused you real harm, even if it is not shown in an accounting document. The Civil Code allows for the reparation of non-property damage when the harm is attributable to the perpetrator of the act, and in the case of harm to bodily integrity or health, it also allows compensation for the restriction of family and social life. In the case of death, the law also provides compensation for the pain suffered by close relatives or other persons who can prove such harm.
In practice, courts have awarded such compensation in cases where a person’s dignity and reputation were harmed by defamatory statements or inaccurate information published, but also in cases concerning improper conditions of detention or other serious infringements of personal rights.
What does it mean, concretely, non-pecuniary damages?
Specifically, moral damages are the non-economic consequences of the unlawful act. The High Court pointed out that moral harm has no economic content, that there are no precise criteria for quantification, and that its assessment is made by appreciation, in a reasonable and fair manner, according to the concrete circumstances of the case.
This means that there is no „price” for suffering. The court does not count the days of discomfort and does not automatically translate each touch into a fixed sum. It seeks a fair satisfaction, that is, a compensation that mitigates the effects of the harm without turning into unjust material gain. The Supreme Court has consistently formulated this idea, insisting that compensation must maintain a reasonable ratio of proportionality to the harm suffered and not be diverted from its compensatory purpose.
What matters most in determining the amount
The courts look at the concrete negative consequences of the act, the importance of the values harmed, the intensity with which the effects were felt, their duration, and their impact on family, professional, and social life. The Supreme Court expressly held that these criteria must be analyzed in relation to the particular circumstances of the case, and in cases involving moral damages, the updating of the evaluation is also done in relation to the relevant jurisprudence, which serves as a guide, not an absolute rule.
In another case, the High Court emphasized that the mere existence of an offense against honor, dignity, or reputation can support the finding of certain moral harm, without the need for impossible evidence regarding the internal experiences of the victim. At the same time, the court maintained the idea that the assessment must remain reasonable, balanced, and compatible with the realities of the case.
Why it’s not enough to just say that you were affected
Moral damages are not awarded for any grievance, but for a legally relevant injury. That is precisely why the analysis starts from the fact, from the connection with the harm and from the way in which that fact concretely affected your personal or professional position. In the absence of such a correlation, the claim remains vulnerable, even if the discomfort was real.
In criminal cases or in cases arising from an unjust accusation, from false public statements or from abusive treatment by the authorities, the goal is not just to show that you were wronged. The goal is to show what in your life was affected, how severely, for how long, and why the amount requested reflects this reality without exaggeration.
Practical conclusion
Moral damages are about repairing real suffering, not about punishing the opponent. You can claim them when there is an unlawful act that has affected your non-property right, and you can show, with concrete data, what effect it has had on you. And the amount is not determined by a fixed formula, but by fairness, proportionality, and the concrete impact of the act.
If you want to see whether your situation justifies a claim for non-pecuniary damages and what amount should be claimed, the analysis must be based on facts, context and evidence, not on assumptions.
Legal texts: See Civil Code, In particular, Articles 253 and 1391 concerning the compensation of non-pecuniary damage. In a specific case, the basis and the prescription are established according to the fact and the claim made.
