In domestic tort law, the subjective concept of non-pecuniary damage has been adopted, according to which non-pecuniary damage does not consist in the mere violation of personality rights, that is, a personal interest as the object of a subjective non-pecuniary right, but rather in the pain or fear suffered, or in the violation of the intimate sphere that causes a disturbance in the psychological balance of the injured party. The violation of the constitutionally guaranteed right to non-discrimination constitutes an infringement of personality rights, and fair compensation belongs to the right holder whose degree of harm and the circumstances of the case justify the award of monetary satisfaction. Therefore, pain, as a legal category, has exceptional significance in tort law. In this paper, the author first examines the theoretical concepts of compensation for non-pecuniary damage - the subjective, objective, and mixed approaches - and explains the primary orientation of the Serbian legislator, as well as certain deviations. This theoretical distinction serves as the basis for the analysis of available case law in anti-discrimination litigation, with the aim of determining whether there are certain shortcomings in the understanding and, consequently, in the consistent application of the subjective concept of non-pecuniary damage in practice. Finally, an overview of how courts approach the criteria for awarding compensation for non-pecuniary damage, taking into account the relevant provisions of the Law on Obligations is provided.
Andjelija Tasic (Thu,) studied this question.