According to the provisions of Article 932 of the Civil Code, “in the event of a tort, regardless of compensation for property damage, the court may award reasonable monetary compensation, at its discretion, for moral damages.
This applies in particular to those who have suffered damage to their health, honor, or chastity, or who have been deprived of their liberty…”. It follows from the above provision that in the event of an attack on a person’s health, the person entitled to claim monetary compensation is the person who has directly suffered the moral damage against whom the tort is directed (AP 648/2002 EllDk 2002.1616). Such a person is the holder of the legal right that was infringed (e.g. the owner of the damaged car, the person injured as a result of a car accident) or another person who is the holder of a contractual right that is protected against tort under Article 914 of the Civil Code (e.g., a tenant, a user) (see Kritikos, Compensation for Motor Vehicle Accidents, 1998 edition, p. 330, no. 945, EfDod 212/2004 Dim. NOMOS). Exceptionally, in the event of death, the beneficiaries are the persons belonging to the victim’s family.
Third parties are not entitled by law to monetary compensation, even if they suffer emotional distress due to a close family relationship or other close connection.
However, rigid application of this principle can lead to cruelty. For this reason, in cases of serious physical injury to the face resulting in the loss of important bodily functions, as a result of which the person is considered to be in a “vegetative state” to such an extent that they are close to death, third parties (relatives) are also recognised as having a claim for financial compensation for moral damage. Such well-known cases include the serious injury of a child, as a result of which he or she falls into a state of unconsciousness, and the case of the inability of the person (spouse) to have sexual intercourse or procreate. In such cases, a claim for monetary compensation for moral damage is recognized for the child’s parents and the spouse of the injured person (but also for the person who has become incapacitated).
Here, the case is different when the serious injury of the minor child occurs in front of his mother, who suffers a nervous breakdown and is forced to be hospitalized in a neurological clinic. This is considered to be physical injury to the mother herself, i.e., a wrongful act committed against her. Consequently, she also suffers moral damage and is entitled, in principle, to monetary compensation (see relevant Ath, Kritikos, Compensation from motor vehicle accidents, 1998 edition, p. 332).
In general, however, according to prevailing case law and theory, third parties are not entitled by law to monetary compensation, even if they were involved in the accident but did not suffer physical injury, unless the circumstances of the accident were such that they suffered physical injury, even in the form of psychological shock, in which case they are considered to be victims of the tort and are entitled to monetary compensation for moral damage (see Ath. Kritikos, op. cit., p. 330 ff. and decision no. 5665/2009 of the Single-Member Court of First Instance of Piraeus, A’ PUBLICATION LAW, CASE 2010/48).
In such cases, these are referred to as “Shockschaden” (shock damage), in which it is possible to recognize a right to monetary compensation for moral damage and any other violation of the personality of a third party that affects the feelings of affection of another, if the act is unlawful also vis-à-vis third parties and if the causal link also covers these emotional effects. In such cases of serious offenses against a third party, according to the most correct view, it is considered that Article 932(3) of the Civil Code should be applied by analogy (see Styl. Paterakis, “Financial Compensation for Moral Damage,” 2nd edition, 2011, p. 92).
