Fair monetary compensation for non-material damage: how much courts award

The key provision is Article 189 of the Law on Obligations (LO). According to paragraph 1, in the case of a violation of personal rights the court, if it finds that the severity of the violation and the circumstances of the case justify it, shall award fair monetary compensation, independently of compensation for material damage and even in its absence. In other words, non-material damage is compensated on its own — material damage need not exist first in order to obtain compensation for mental or physical pain.

Paragraph 2 instructs how the court measures the amount: it shall take into account “the intensity and duration of the harm that caused physical pain, mental pain and fear,” as well as the purpose the compensation serves, while ensuring that the compensation is not contrary to aims incompatible with its nature and social purpose. This sentence is the heart of the whole matter. From it flow the two main factors in the calculation: the intensity and the duration of the harm.

Paragraph 3 extends the right to legal persons as well — for a violation of the right to reputation and other personal rights, the court may likewise award fair monetary compensation. Paragraph 4 provides that where the matter is regulated differently by another law, the rules of that law apply (for example, the special rules on compensation for unlawful deprivation of liberty under the Law on Criminal Procedure).

It is important to understand the legal nature of this compensation. In its decisions the Supreme Court consistently emphasises that fair monetary compensation constitutes satisfaction, not real compensation — it does not “pay” for the pain at some price, but provides social recognition and a certain relief for the suffering endured. That is why the amounts are not arbitrary, yet neither are they reduced to a mathematical formula.

Before turning to the amounts, it is important to know that compensation is awarded separately for each type (ground) of non-material damage. One and the same harmful event — for example a traffic accident — may give rise to several separate awards. In the practice of Macedonian courts the following grounds are most frequently encountered:

• Physical pain suffered — for the physical pain itself caused by the injuries and the treatment.
• Fear suffered — for the fear experienced at the moment of the event and afterwards (primary and secondary fear).
• Mental pain due to reduced life activity — when the injury leaves lasting consequences that reduce the general quality of, and ability for, life and work.
• Mental pain due to disfigurement (aesthetic appearance) — for permanent scars, deformities and the like.
• Mental pain due to the death of a close person — for the closest family members of the deceased.
• Harm to honour and reputation — in defamation, insult and similar violations of personal rights.

Each of these grounds is established and valued separately, most often on the basis of the findings and opinion of an expert witness (a physician of the appropriate specialty, a neuropsychiatrist and the like), who describes the type, degree, intensity and duration of the pain.

What follows are indicative ranges based on an analysis of Supreme Court decisions for the period 2021–2026. These amounts are illustrative, not a tariff — each case is assessed according to its specific circumstances. Nevertheless, they give a realistic picture of the order of magnitude that can be expected.

Traffic accidents are by far the most common source of non-material damage — in the analysed case law they make up the majority of cases. In more serious injuries (polytrauma with multiple fractures) the total amounts for all grounds together reach several hundred thousand denars, and in the most serious cases over one million denars. In one characteristic case of polytrauma with fractures of the hip, femur and lower leg, the Supreme Court set a total non-material damage award of about 800,000 denars, with part of the claim being rejected.

The individual grounds in bodily injuries move in practice roughly as follows: for physical pain suffered, from around a hundred thousand to several hundred thousand denars depending on severity; for fear suffered, usually from about 200,000 to 700,000 denars where consequences are pronounced and long-lasting; for reduced life activity, from several hundred thousand to one million denars where consequences are permanent and severe. In the most serious cases, total claims and awards reach as much as 1,200,000 – 1,600,000 denars.

Here the amounts are the highest, reflecting the gravity of the loss. In one case in which a person was deprived of life, the courts awarded compensation to the closest family members, and the Supreme Court harmonised the amounts to: 1,200,000 denars for each parent, 1,000,000 denars for the wife and 800,000 denars for each child. The claim of the grandchild, who did not live in a household with the deceased, was reduced to 300,000 denars, and to the extent it exceeded that — rejected.

This example illustrates the logic well: the closer and tighter the family and life bond with the deceased, the higher the compensation. That is why parents, the spouse and the children receive the highest amounts, while for more distant relatives the compensation is significantly lower or may be absent if there is no lasting shared household.

For unlawful or unfounded deprivation of liberty, practice shows a per-day compensation approach for each day spent in detention or prison. In the analysed decisions, daily amounts run around 3,000 denars per day for pronounced and acute mental suffering of strong intensity. Thus, for 245 days of unlawful deprivation of liberty the Supreme Court upheld compensation of 735,000 denars (3,000 denars per day), while in another case for about 90 days of detention an amount of 360,000 denars was set. The daily rate is not fixed — it depends on the strength and duration of the mental pain, as well as the personal and family consequences for the injured party.

In defamation, insult and other violations of reputation and honour, the amounts are usually lower than in serious bodily injuries or death, and depend heavily on the severity of the violation, the manner and extent of its dissemination, and the consequences for the harmed person. Here too the measure remains the same — the severity of the violation and the circumstances of the case that justify the compensation, pursuant to Article 189 paragraphs 1 and 3.

Understanding why two seemingly similar cases end with different amounts is crucial. Several decisive factors stand out from the case law.

Intensity and duration of the harm. This is the statutory criterion from Article 189 paragraph 2 and the most important single factor. The same diagnosis with short-lived pain and the same diagnosis with prolonged, intense suffering and permanent consequences are not valued equally. That is why the expert’s findings on the intensity and duration of the pain are often the decisive evidence.

Shared responsibility and contribution of the injured party. If the injured party contributed to the occurrence of the damage, the compensation is reduced proportionally. In one traffic-accident example, responsibility was split 50:50 between the participants, which directly affected the final amount. The injured party’s own contribution (for example, an unfastened seatbelt, improper conduct) regularly reduces the awarded sum.

The role of the expert examination. Because pain and fear are not visible “from the outside,” courts rely on expert findings and opinions. A quality, reasoned expert examination describing the type, degree, intensity and duration of the injuries is the basis for awarding compensation; a superficial or unreasoned examination often leads to the judgment being quashed.

The nature of the compensation as satisfaction. Courts take care that the amount does not turn into a source of unjust enrichment and is not contrary to the social purpose of the compensation. That is why excessive claims are regularly reduced — this is precisely why first-instance amounts are often adjusted downwards in the higher instances.

A large part of the analysed decisions are the result of revision — an extraordinary legal remedy by which the parties challenge, among other things, the amount of the awarded compensation. The role of the Supreme Court here is twofold: to check whether the lower courts correctly applied substantive law (in particular Article 189 of the LO) and, through this, to contribute to the consistency of case law — so that similar injuries receive similar amounts across the whole country.

That is precisely why the analysed cases often show the pattern in which the first-instance court awards a higher amount, the court of appeal reduces it, and the Supreme Court confirms or further adjusts the decision, explaining why the specific sum is “fair” within the meaning of Article 189. For the injured party this means that the amount set at first instance is not final — it may change in appeal proceedings and on revision.

If you are seeking compensation for non-material damage, several clear expectations follow from the case law. Compensation is awarded separately for each type of harm — physical pain, fear, reduced life activity, disfigurement, mental pain due to the death of a loved one and harm to reputation. The amount depends above all on the intensity and duration of the harm, and the expert examination is the key evidence. The most serious cases (death of a loved one, severe polytrauma) carry the highest amounts — for parents, spouse and children even over a million denars per person, while harm to honour is usually valued at lower sums. Shared responsibility reduces the compensation. And finally, the amounts are satisfaction, not the price of pain — which is why excessive claims are adjusted, and the Supreme Court safeguards their consistency.