Abstract
While serious bodily injury gives rise to a claim for compensation in the amount of up to fifteen million Czech crowns or more, the death of the primary victim leaves only a claim for compensation for secondary (reflexive) injury, which is usually an order of magnitude lower. In this disproportion, a moral paradox can be seen, whereby from a private law perspective, the infliction of a more serious consequence is more favourable for the tortfeasor.
A related problem is the condition of prior application of the claim for personal injury in court, so that the right in question can pass to the heirs in the event of the death of the primary injured party. A way out of the outlined problems could be the introduction of compensation for the loss of life itself, for which we introduce the term ontological harm.
This damage is compensated rather exceptionally in the continental legal culture, where it is a common practice only in Portugal. The problematic aspects of ontological harm are obvious: primarily the absence of legal personality of the injured party, the potentially punitive nature of the compensation, or its difficult quantification.
Nevertheless, it is realistically possible that the concept of ontological harm will also be discussed in the Czech legal environment in the future as a tool for ensuring a fair response of tort law to situations of unlawful killing.