Search Results
Search Results
-
ThE LIMITS OF ThE PRINCIPLE OF FULL REPARATION
The principle of full reparation is an essential part in the modern civil liability. Its content requires the measure of compensation commensurate with the extent of damage caused, leaving out any other consideration. However, in some cases, this principle recognizes limits or exceptions of various origins and various foundations. On the contrary, none of them is a revocation. On the contrary, all are fully compatible with their recognition.
-
CRITERIA FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF MORAL DAMAGES: A VIEW FROM CHILEAN CASE LAW
This article provides a critical assessment of the criteria employed by Chilean courts to justify the amount awarded for moral damages. Based on an analysis of a series of judgments recognizing such damages, the decisions are classified according to the central argument relied upon by the court in determining the quantum of compensation. Although this classification may be debatable in some cases, given that the decisive reasoning is not always explicit, the selection process is made transparent through cross-references provided in the footnotes. The initial classification criteria were drawn from legal scholarship and subsequently supplemented with additional criteria identified during the jurisprudential review. This study makes it possible to distinguish between argumentative practices that are consistent with the rules and principles of civil liability and those that deviate from them, thereby contributing to a clearer understanding of which criteria are legally sound and which are deficient.
-
THE AUTONOMY OF DAMAGES IN THE RECENT NATIONAL CASE LAW: A PARADIGM SHIFT?
The current work aims to tackle the autonomy of damages compensation for breach of contract within the current national precedent, by analyzing, systematizing and determining the pertinence of the premises and arguments that have been cited by the national courts to hold autonomy damages against breach of a debtor, getting away from the judicial reasoning which, for decades has postulated that this remedy could only be demanded as an accessory action or remedy, concurrent or supplementary to the aspiration of specific performance remedy or termination of contract.