ON THE AUTONOMY OF DAMAGES FOR BODILY INJURY. COMMENTARY ON THE CHILEAN SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT, CASE NO. 18687-2024

Abstract

This commentary examines a Supreme Court ruling in a civil liability case. While the Court dismissed the defendant’s appeal, it considered the bodily injury only as a factor in increasing the amount of moral damages awarded by the lower court. This decision is criticized as constituting a case of “blanket condemnation,” and the commentary defends the independent compensation for bodily injury, understood as the impairment of an individual’s physical and mental integrity. After reviewing the three prevailing doctrinal paradigms in Chile, the commentary adheres to the position that requires separate assessment of bodily injury from other nonpecuniary damages. It concludes that bodily injury should be considered an independent category, distinct from pain and suffering compensation, based on the constitutional guarantee of physical and mental integrity, as well as the broad scope of the general civil liability clause in Chile, thus elevating the human body to the status of an interest worthy of independent protection.