In contrast to pecuniary damage, non-pecuniary damage is understood in the broadest sense to mean any interference with an individual's personality, as defined by the individual's personality rights. Modern legal systems protect part of this spectrum, i.e. legally recognised non-pecuniary damage, in the context of tort law. In continental jurisdictions however, the protection of non-pecuniary damage is generally narrower than that of pecuniary damage.
The narrower approach to the protection of non-pecuniary damage in tort stems from the historical reticence of legislators to recognise non-pecuniary interests as something that could be the subject of private or tort law. However, legal theory and case-law soon overcame such reticence in the light of a number of historical developments. This trend continues to this day, as the subject area is considered to be one of the most attractive areas of legal research.
Despite this trend, the legal protection of non-pecuniary damage remains controversial and to a considerable extent still marked by a historically restrained approach, reflected not only in the statutory provisions but also in legal doctrine and case-law, which is the subject of the present master's thesis.
The master's thesis examines the German and Slovenian tort law protection of non-pecuniary damage in a comparative legal context, focusing in particular on the forms and functions of non-pecuniary damage in the two legal systems under comparison.