Acceso usuarios
Diana Rocío González Vázquez, Yeyetsy Guadalupe Ordóñez Azuara, Raúl Gutiérrez, María de Jesús Medina, Fabiola Doracely Yépez Rincón
This article addresses the use of experts in the assessment of moral damage. It analyzes several different systems used to quantify compensation for moral damage: the subjective system, the scale-based system, the scale system with an algorithm, and the mixed expert-judicial system. The article reveals that the complexities involved in the quantification of moral damage and the lack of uniformity and objectivity in the application of these various systems demonstrate the need for standardized methodologies. While the use of experts has become increasingly accepted, this practice faces challenges in calculating complete and equitable compensation. The article concludes by suggesting that a robust mixed expert-judicial system would be the most advantageous, as judicial decisions are based on objective criteria provided by experts who specialize in the disciplines most relevant to a particular case, such as psychology, medicine, criminology, social work, dentistry, bioethics, engineering, and accounting. Using this system would allow for a more individualized and equitable assessment of moral damages, thereby overcoming both the limitations inherent in a system that uses judicial discretion alone and the rigidity of systems that utilize fixed scales.
