I talked about the taxonomy of non-pecuniary losses in English and French law. Whilst non-pecuniary losses account for up to one third of damages in personal injury cases, they are not doctrinally well considered in England. I expaded on my terminological research dealing with the words damage, loss, wrong, and harm, and how those are all used interchangeably. I also talked about the two theoretical models that can be used to explain my research. In some cases, a two-tier (or bipolar) structure can be observed, where the wrong and the concrete consequential losses that flow from it are conceptually different. In this model all the losses flow from the individual wrong. Personal Injury aligns to a bi-polar model. However, in other situations, it is possible to see the operation of a unipolar model (which is also normative and abstract) where wrong and loss are conflated. Protection of privacy aligns to the unipolar model. Frequently, these two models are used at the same time by the courts both in England and France, thus creating potential overlaps between these two logics.