Abstract

The Italian legal system provides for the compensation also of non-pecuniary damages: how can we translate in a sum of money a loss that is not subjected to economic evaluation in objective terms? The judge probably does not proceed to the maximization of the utilities involved in the decision: it is difficult to define the expectations and the preferences and it is equally difficult finding a rule accepted by all, that allows us to choose between alternatives. In some cases the court aims to achieve satisfactory results, but with the limits given by the heuristics, which leading to decisions not always conformed to a «rational» model. In most cases the judge liquidates the damage following a logic of appropriateness. The judge does not analyze the various options and he does not choose the best option, but he adapts himself to a rule that he considers shared and appropriate. This logic of appropriateness, as the experimental data show, seems to be based on the symbols and the language: these elements, realistically, contribute to create the share around the rules for compensation.