Compensation for non-pecuniary damage in the case of protection of personal non-property rights in the context of digitalization

The institute of personal non-property rights has garnered scholarly attention for decades; however, contemporary globalisation and digitalisation have profoundly influenced the fundamental nature of these rights, resulting in modern challenges that necessitate new research into the digital transformation of social relations. This situation calls for the adjustment of legal provisions governing personal non-property relations and the establishment of a framework for the legal protection and security of participants in such relations. Article 56 of the Constitution of Ukraine stipulates that individuals are entitled to compensation from the state or local self-government entities for material and moral damages resulting from unlawful decisions, actions, or omissions by state authorities, local self-government bodies, and their officials and employees in the execution of their duties. The primary method of safeguarding personal non-property rights is through compensation for non-pecuniary harm amid the ongoing digitalisation of interpersonal contacts. Non-pecuniary harm refers to adverse effects of a moral or non-property nature resulting from bodily pain, infringement of non- property rights or rights intimately associated with property rights, or other detrimental occurrences stemming from unlawful activities. Positive emotions can mitigate the harm inflicted by compensation. The essay focusses on the nuances of civil law regarding compensation for non-pecuniary damages resulting from the infringement of personal non-property rights over the Internet via appropriate applications. Academics contend that it is essential to distinctly differentiate among the rights to data protection, confidentiality, and identification. This serves not only to provide a coherent and efficient legal framework but also to guarantee comprehensive and dependable protection of all facets of an individual’s identity. It is concluded that in instances of PDO violations during digitalisation, non-pecuniary damages should be reimbursed generally, acknowledging that individuals may experience mental pain and grief akin to actual suffering. The persecution of an individual via information technology inflicts much greater anguish than persecution in the physical realm. The author suggests amending Part 2 of Article 23 of the Civil Code of Ukraine concerning compensation for non-pecuniary damages.