i

Articles received by April 30 can be published in the first semester, and those received by September 15 can be published in the corresponding second-semester issue.

Moral persons as non pecuniary loss victims: what has our jurisprudence said?

Authors

  • Ignacio Ríos Erazo Abogado, Licenciado en Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad de Chile. Ayudante de Derecho Civil. Abogado Asociado Barros & Errázuriz
  • Rodrigo Silva Goñi Abogado, Licenciado en Cultad de Deriencias Jurídicas y Sociales de la Facecho, Universidad de Chile. Ayudante de Derecho Civil. Coordinador de la tramitación legislativa del Proyecto de Ley que establece el Código Procesal Civil, Ministerio de Justicia

Abstract

Non pecuniary loss has been a source of interesting debates on the civilian doctrine. All aspects of this concept wake contradictory opinions among writers, judges, teachers and litigants. The definition and types of non pecuniary loss, its victim, the holders of the liability action, its transmissibility, the purpose of the compensation, the appropriate way to quantify it, whether to set scales criteria, how judges value this damages, the huge amounts demanded or granted for this item, the sphere of liability where it operates, the need to prove it, are issues that have nurtured the liability literature with dissimilar viewpoints. Here we review the way the jurisprudence of our country answers to the question about the standing of moral persons to claim compensation for non pecuniary loss. This, from the first time a Chilean court addressed this issue, until the most recent sentences. Our purpose is to unveil the criteria followed by judges, examining the judgments that have ruled on the point. Depending on the results we get, it may be possible start talking about a legal precedent.    

Keywords:

non pecuniary loss, pretium doloris, moral person, jurisprudence, liability