Question

A well-known dispute among the later authorities (Netivot and Chazon Ish) concerns a case where someone damages another person’s item, when that item is of no use to anyone except the injured party—whether the damager is liable (for example, special glasses made specifically for that person; that is, on the face of it, a matter of dispute). Is that dispute also about things that have purely subjective value, meaning they are not worth even a perutah at all (for example, Ravina, who held one liable for tooth-damage in the case of scraping off images [Bava Kamma], which seems to imply subjective value), or perhaps we require it to count as property/monetary value, like glasses and the like?