Compensation in kind
Compensation may be in kind or equivalent in the form of damages.
In non-contractual matters, reparation in kind is less obvious than in contractual matters insofar as material damage is more common than personal injury.
When the time comes to give judgment, and if both are sought and the claims are contradictory, the judge will have to decide and prefer one method of reparation to the other.
The choice is therefore not left to the victim.
In some cases, it is difficult to impose reparation in kind, and even if reparation in kind is more suitable for the victim, the judge will often prefer reparation in damages to avoid disproportionate consequences.
Compensation in kind consists of taking a measure other than a monetary one to enable the victim to make good his or her loss.
It may therefore consist of a measure to put an end to the unlawful act or measures to eliminate the damage as effectively as possible.
In the case of personal injury, reparation by equivalent is preferred.
Under reparation by equivalent, the victim is awarded a sum of money, which he or she is free to dispose of, to compensate for the damage.
This is important because the judge cannot decide for the victim how to use the sum.
Cass. civ. 3, 10 December 2015, no. 14-22.103
Cass. crim. 2 June 2015, no. 14-83.967
Cass. civ. 2, 7 July 2011, no. 10-20.373
“That in so ruling, whereas the principle of full reparation does not imply any control over the use of the funds allocated to the victim, who retains their free use, the local court violated the aforementioned text.”
Cass. civ. 2, 7 July 2011, no. 10-20.373
The idea is therefore for the judge to opt for a realistic system of reparation that will enable the victim to return to his or her initial state in the best possible way.
Whether you are seeking compensation in kind or in equivalent, DAMY can assert your claims for compensation before any court.
