In short
Article 1538 of the Civil Code of 2020 answers something almost nobody knows they get to choose: the reparation of damage is effected in money, by specific reinstatement or a combination of the foregoing remedies, at the injured party’s choice, provided there is no duplication of the compensation. Three options, and the choice belongs to the injured party, not to whoever caused the damage; the only written limit is not collecting twice for the same thing. Its second paragraph opens an additional door for the gravest cases: where the act or omission constitutes a crime, is done wilfully or with grave disregard for another’s life, safety and property, the adjudicator may impose an additional compensation not exceeding the amount of the damage caused. Both halves of that sentence deserve reading: it is discretionary — the adjudicator "may" impose it — and it is capped at the amount of the damage caused. Article 1539 resolves the case of several responsible parties: where several persons cause damage by independent acts of fault or negligence, liability towards the injured party is solidary, without prejudice to the right of levelling among the co-causers. Solidary means the injured party may go against any of them for the whole; the levelling is the later adjustment among those who caused the damage, and the Code names it without describing how it works or in what shares. Note too the condition the article writes: it speaks of damage caused by independent acts. What these two articles do not carry is the definition of specific reinstatement, how the additional compensation is measured within its cap, what makes disregard grave, or the period to claim.
What is it?
They are Articles 1538 and 1539 of the Civil Code of 2020: in what forms damage is repaired and who chooses, when an additional award is available, and what happens when several persons caused the damage.
Who can do it?
Whoever suffered damage caused by fault or negligence and claims its reparation, under the Puerto Rico Civil Code.
Requirements
- The reparation is effected in money, by specific reinstatement or a combination of both, at the injured party’s choice.Verified against the official source
- The only written limit on that choice is that there be no duplication of the compensation.Verified against the official source
- Where the act or omission constitutes a crime, is wilful or shows grave disregard for another’s life, safety and property, the adjudicator may impose an additional award not exceeding the amount of the damage caused.Verified against the official source
- Where several persons cause damage by independent acts of fault or negligence, liability towards the injured party is solidary.Verified against the official source
Documents you need
Cost
Step by step
Step 1: Three forms of reparation
Article 1538: in money, by specific reinstatement, or a combination of the foregoing remedies. The Code does not define here what specific reinstatement is, and this guide does not define it for it.
Step 2: And the choice is yours
The same article: at the injured party’s choice. It is not chosen by whoever caused the damage nor by whoever pays: it is chosen by whoever suffered it. It is the line most people do not know is there.
Step 3: With one limit: no double recovery
Closing of the first sentence: provided there is no duplication of the compensation. Combining remedies is allowed; collecting twice for the same thing is not.
Step 4: When the case is grave: an additional award
Second paragraph: where the act or omission constitutes a crime, is done wilfully or with grave disregard for another’s life, safety and property. Three situations, and one suffices.
Step 5: It is discretionary and capped
The same paragraph: the adjudicator may impose an additional compensation not exceeding the amount of the damage caused. "May", not "must"; and the ceiling is the amount of the damage. The Code does not say how it is measured within that cap.
Step 6: If there were several: you may go against any
Article 1539: where several persons cause damage by independent acts of fault or negligence, liability towards the injured party is solidary. Solidary means the injured party may claim the whole from any of them.
Step 7: The word "independent" is in the text
The article speaks of damage caused by independent acts of fault or negligence. That condition is written, and this guide reproduces it rather than generalising.
Step 8: And they settle among themselves afterwards
Closing of 1539: without prejudice to the right of levelling among the co-causers. The Code names the levelling and does not describe how it works or in what shares; this guide does not supply that.
Step 9: What these articles do not carry
They do not define specific reinstatement, do not say what makes disregard grave, do not say how the additional award is computed within its cap, do not describe the levelling, and set no claiming period.
Step 10: And a warning about the rest of the chapter
The articles that follow — liability for others’ acts and liability without fault — are not in this guide. The consolidated text we read runs through Act 130-2026 and Act 191-2026 amended them afterwards; there is a separate guide on that change, read from the statute itself.
Where to do it
The Code names no agency for this chapter. The claim and the additional award of Article 1538 are decided by the adjudicator in the Court of First Instance.
How long it takes
What to do if something goes wrong
If your claim is against an employer for its employee, against a vehicle owner, against a hospital or over an animal, those articles are not here: Act 191-2026 amended that part of the chapter and the consolidated text we used does not carry it. If the damage comes from a breach of contract, compensation runs on other rules, with its own guide. If your case is against a government agency or a public corporation, several have their own procedures and separate guides on this site. These two articles do not define specific reinstatement, do not describe the levelling among co-causers, and set no period. MiPRFácil does not represent anyone in court and gives no legal advice.
Common mistakes
- Accepting money without knowing Article 1538 leaves the form of reparation to the injured party’s choice.
- Believing one must choose between money and restoration: the article admits a combination of both.
- Forgetting the only written limit: that there be no duplication of the compensation.
- Taking the additional award for granted: the adjudicator "may" impose it, not must.
- Expecting an additional award above the amount of the damage caused: that is its cap.
- Claiming from only one co-causer believing it must be split: liability towards the injured party is solidary.
- Overlooking that Article 1539 speaks of independent acts.
- Looking in these articles for how the levelling among co-causers works: the Code names it without describing it.
- Reading the chapter’s next articles in the consolidated text without knowing Act 191-2026 amended them.
Frequently asked questions
Must they pay me in money or can they fix it?
Article 1538 admits money, specific reinstatement or a combination of both, at the injured party’s choice, provided there is no duplication of the compensation.
Is an extra award available if it was done on purpose?
Article 1538 says that where the act or omission constitutes a crime, is done wilfully or with grave disregard for another’s life, safety and property, the adjudicator may impose an additional compensation not exceeding the amount of the damage caused.
Several people caused my damage. Whom do I claim from?
Article 1539 says that where several persons cause damage by independent acts of fault or negligence, liability towards the injured party is solidary, without prejudice to the right of levelling among the co-causers.
How is it split among them afterwards?
Article 1539 names the right of levelling among the co-causers and does not describe how it works or in what shares. This guide does not fill that in.
Official sources
These are the government pages this guide is based on.
- Poder Judicial de Puerto Rico
Poder Judicial
bvirtualogp.pr.gov
Last verified
September 10, 2026
MiPRFácil is an independent informational website and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by the Government of Puerto Rico or any government agency.
MiPRFácil does not submit applications on your behalf.
Was this guide helpful?
Did you find out-of-date information?
Negligence damage: family immunity applies, with two ways out
Article 1536 requires repairing damage caused by fault or negligence; 1537 bars it between certain relatives, save a crime or no family unity.
What is claimed when someone breaches: loss suffered and gain not made
A good-faith debtor answers for what was foreseeable at contracting; one who breaches wilfully, for everything. On money debts, interest.
Several debtors: when each pays a share and when one is charged the lot
Solidarity is not presumed: the obligation or the law must say so. Without it, the debt is presumed divided into equal parts.
When the hospital answers for a doctor’s negligence
Act 191-2026 moved hospital liability from strict to vicarious: they can now defend themselves by proving they acted with diligence.
Carelessness, bad faith or bad luck: who answers for what
With no agreed standard, that of a prudent and reasonable person applies. Waiving the action for wilful breach is void.
What an obligation is and where it comes from
Six sources, and the list stays open. Whoever performs knowing they were not bound cannot demand it back.