Les vicissitudes du préjudice d'agrément

The fate of the loss of amenity has always been related to the right of recourse of the third-party payers against the person in charge of the damage. The loss of amenity has been recognized by Law of the 27 December 1973. It was at that time that it was excluded from the recourse of the third-party payers. It was not the case of the physiological injuries which had always been submitted to the recourse of the third-party payers. At first, these injuries had included the disorders in the conditions of existence. But in 2005, the Dintilhac nomenclature adopted a restrictive conception of the loss of amenity. This damage is now defined as the impossibility to practice regularly a specific activity of sport or leisure. In addition, the Law of 21 December 2006 imposed on third-party payers to exercise their action only on pecuniary damage. The physiological injuries were therefore excluded from this action. The strict definition of loss of amenity is both adopted in Civil Law and Social law. But in these two areas, the analysis of the judicial practice reveals that it is undermined the right for the full repair of the victims under their loss of amenity. Accordingly, the question of the opportunity to widen once more the definition of the loss of amenity arises today.