Summary

The concept of non-proprietary damage has deserved little attention in substantive law and has been largely left to the hands of judicial law and case law. The texts of legislation often refer to the possibility of claiming compensation for non-proprietary damage, but what can be treated as non-proprietary damage and the amount of compensation for such damage are only accorded general treatment.
The author examines whether and how the Law of Obligations Act supports the filing of claims for non-proprietary damage. The author focuses on the possibilities open for a third person and a legal person for filing claims for compensation for non-proprietary damage and the dependence of the right of claim on the type of non-proprietary damage, and addresses different ways of compensating for damage. Looking at the case law, the author tries to find an answer to the question how readily the Estonian courts recognise non-proprietary damage claims, the amounts of compensation awarded, the evidence allowed by judges in establishing non-proprietary damage, and the justification of the requested amount of compensation. In addition to the Estonian legislation and case law, the author brings examples from and draws parallels with the law of other countries, mostly that of Germany, France, Great Britain and the USA.