Nr. 3 (2020): Non-material Damages
The idea of "moral damages" and, correlatively, the idea of "reparation" for such "damages", ideas that have been rejected since antiquity, have long been considered "shocking" and "illogical". Instead of arguments, a few rhetorical questions: how to consider that a moral value, not susceptible to "destruction" or "deterioration", can nevertheless be "repaired" by a monetary equivalent; how to admit that money can replace tears, that suffering can be evaluated in money, even in relation to its degree of intensity? How can you admit that pain and suffering can cease or become more bearable in relation to the amount of the increase in the bank account?
These are the essential fragments - sublimated into emblematic, precise and expressive words. Multiple levels legitimise the debate, since moral damage is one of those constants of the legal current that exhaust the arguments without monopolising the truth of compensation.
