Comparative legal analysis of methods for determining the amount of compensation for moral damage in Kazakhstan and foreign practice

Abstract

The article presents a comparative legal analysis of methods for determining the amount of compensation for moral (non-pecuniary) damage in the civil law of the Republic of Kazakhstan and foreign countries. It examines the features of regulatory frameworks and judicial practice in continental European and Anglo-American legal systems, including France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. The authoMjdentifies key similarities and differences in approaches to assessing moral damage and analyzes the criteria of proportionality, reasonableness—md fairness in determining the amount of compensation. Based on an analysis of judicial practice in the Republic of Kazakhstan, existing problems are revealed, such as the lack of unified methodological guidelines and the broad scope of judicial discretion. As recommendations, the author proposes introducing elements of foreign models in Kazakhstan: a tabular system of reference amounts expressed in multiples of the monthly calculation index (MCI), a rule requiring mandatory justificatioaJpr deviations from established ranges, and the creation of a national registry of court decisions on compensation for moral damage. The implementation of these measures would ensure consistency injudicial practice, enhance transparency and predictability of decisions, increase public trust in the judiciary, and align the institution of compensation for moral damage with international human rights protection standards.