Short answer. Yes — nominal damages exist for exactly that situation. They are adjudicated so that a right which has been violated or invaded may be vindicated or recognised, and expressly not to indemnify any loss. The award marks that the right was real; it is not a substitute for proving what you lost.

What the law says

Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him.

Civil Code, Article 2221 — Nominal Damages Defined. Read the full provision →

What the law says

No proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral, nominal, temperate, liquidated or exemplary damages, may be adjudicated.

Civil Code, Article 2216 — No Proof of Pecuniary Loss Required. Read the full provision →

The purpose is vindication, not compensation

The definition states its own object: nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him. The closing clause is not a limitation the courts have read into it; it is in the text. So the question a nominal award answers is whether the right existed and was invaded, which is a different question from what the invasion cost. That is why the sums involved are usually modest and why the point of the exercise is the finding rather than the figure.

Why no loss has to be shown

Article 2216 removes the obstacle directly: no proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral, nominal, temperate, liquidated or exemplary damages, may be adjudicated. It adds that the assessment of such damages, liquidated ones aside, is left to the discretion of the court according to the circumstances of each case. Contrast Article 2199, which allows adequate compensation only for pecuniary loss duly proved. The two provisions mark out different territory, and a claim that fails under the second is not necessarily a claim that fails.

Where it sits among the other kinds

It helps to see the ladder. Nominal damages recognise a right invaded without a proved loss. Temperate damages under Article 2224 apply where the court finds some pecuniary loss was suffered but its amount cannot, from the nature of the case, be fixed with certainty — expressly more than nominal and less than compensatory. Actual damages require the loss to be duly proved. Which rung a claim belongs on is a question of what the evidence can carry, and it should be decided before a demand is sent rather than after a hearing has gone badly.

What still has to be proved

Nominal damages excuse you from proving loss. They do not excuse you from proving the violation, which remains the whole of the case. So the file should be built around the right and its invasion: the document or provision the right comes from, what the other party did, when, and the record showing it. Be realistic too about proportion. A claim worth bringing purely for vindication is a decision about principle and cost, and it is worth discussing with a lawyer in those terms.

Cases citing this provision

These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.