NÁHRADA ŠKODY PRI STRATE MOŽNOSTI UŽÍVAŤ VEC

The article deals with the claim of the owner of the damaged thing for compensation for loss of the possibility to use such a thing. It focuses mainly on cases where the owner does not spend any money on the substitute thing during the repair. For example, if the owner of the damaged car does not rent a replacement vehicle, nor does she use taxis or public transport, but instead she walks or uses he bicycle. In such cases, the question arises as to whether such a loss of the possibility to use the thing is pecuniary harm, i.e., the damage to be compensated. The author concludes that this question should be answered in the negative. However, according to the author, this does not mean that in such cases the owner of the damaged thing should not be entitled to any compensation. In particular, the claim for reimbursement of frustrated expenses would be appropriate.