Criterios para la cuantificación del daño moral causado por perjuicios derivados de la responsabilidad patrimonial de las Administraciones Públicas

Abstract

El presente trabajo de investigación se desarrolla en el mundo de los daños morales, específicamente en aquellos causados por las administraciones públicas y los distintos métodos utilizados para una adecuada valoración económica, así como un análisis de los elementos que deben ser tomados en cuenta por los litigantes, para formular una petición adecuada del resarcimiento al daño moral ocasionado. Mi objetivo ha sido examinar la mayor jurisprudencia posible para poder concluir si se aplican criterios objetivos que sirvan de base para la valoración de los daños morales o descubrir si, a pesar de las múltiples sentencias que estiman la procedencia de la indemnización de los daños morales causados, la cuantificación de los daños no patrimoniales es en muchos casos aleatoria por parte de los jueces (al no estar fundamentadas en criterios sustantivos claros), con importante déficit de seguridad jurídica al respecto.

The present investigation work is developed in the world of moral damages, specifically in those caused by the Public Administrations and the different methods used for an adequate economic valuation, as well as an analysis of the elements that should be taken into account by the litigants, to formulate an adequate request for compensation for the moral damage caused. The objective has been to look for the criteria used by legal operators (jurisdictional bodies and consultative juridical bodies of the Public Administrations) that allow us to deduce if these are objectifying the evaluation criteria, taking into account that the Supreme Court despite declaring with character general that it is not incumbent on him to enter to modify the compensation estimated by the "a quo" courts, it does go on to modify the indemnifying quantum in some occasions. The line that separates them is so fine that they practically enter to modify it when they have not been duly accredited or justified the circumstances that have led the Courts to determine it. I also analyze some judgments issued by the Superior Courts of Justice, National Court and some ordinary Court, as well as the position of the Supreme Court with respect to some of them. My objective has been to examine as much case law as possible in order to conclude if objective criteria are applied that serve as a basis for assessing the moral damages or discovering whether, despite the multiple judgments that estimate the origin of compensation for moral damages caused , the quantification of non-patrimonial damages is in many cases random on the part of the judges (since they are not based on clear substantive criteria), with an important legal security deficit in this regard.