Q&A: Is damage damage to property or to monetary value?
Is damage damage to property or to monetary value?
Question
For example, if Reuven had 2 rare vases, each of which was worth $10,000 on the open market, and then Shimon came and broke one of Reuven’s vases. Reuven hired an appraiser, who determined that because of the rarity of the vases, the remaining vase doubled in value and is now worth $20,000.
It turns out that Shimon did not cause Reuven any monetary loss, but only damage to property, and the increase in value of the remaining vase did not happen on its own but occurred because of Shimon’s act.
So the question is: what is the nature of liability for damage?
Answer
A famous question, usually discussed regarding stamps. In my opinion, it is obvious that he must pay for what he damaged, and the increase in value that occurred, occurred.
See here briefly (although the reasoning can be debated): https://banknote.co.il/%D7%94%D7%91%D7%95%D7%9C-%D7%94%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%A8-%D7%91%D7%A2%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%9D-%D7%95%D7%A4%D7%A1%D7%A7-%D7%94%D7%94%D7%9C%D7%9B%D7%94-%D7%A9%D7%9C-%D7%94%D7%A8%D7%91-%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D/