On December 26, 2009, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress voted to pass the "People's Republic of China Tort Liability Law," which Article 22 explicitly provides: "If an infringement upon another person's personal rights and interests causes serious mental distress to that person, the infringed party may claim compensation for mental distress." This is the first time China's current laws explicitly provide for "compensation for mental distress."

Compensation for mental distress refers to the liability for compensation that an infringer should bear due to their tortious conduct infringing upon another person's spiritual interests. When people suffer mental distress, in addition to obtaining relief through cessation of infringement, elimination of effects, and apology, the injured party may also seek monetary compensation. Unfortunately, "compensation for mental distress" has long been in an awkward situation in China's law, with legislative gaps and difficulties in judicial implementation. China's current civil law does not explicitly provide for compensation for mental distress. The draft amendment to the State Compensation Law under review only establishes a compensation for mental distress system limited to the administrative law field. In judicial practice, it mainly relies on the Supreme People's Court's "Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Determination of Compensation for Mental Distress in Civil Torts" for regulation. However, many typical cases concerning claims for compensation for mental distress have occurred in practice, and without clear legal provisions, the judgments regarding compensation for mental distress have varied widely. In 1999, a rape case occurred in Shenzhen. The victim sued the rapist for infringing upon her right to life, health, and chastity. The direct consequences were the plaintiff's lifelong mental suffering, loss of some potential benefits, and reduction of social evaluation. The court determined that the criminal suspect's criminal circumstances were odious, the criminal duration was long, the plaintiff was a virgin, and the damage results were serious. Based on this, the court ruled that Liu shall compensate Zhang 80,000 yuan for mental distress. However, the appellate court, based on the relevant judicial interpretation of the Supreme People's Court, made a final ruling, overturning the first-instance judgment awarding the victim 80,000 yuan and rejecting the victim's claim for compensation for mental distress. But in another case, namely the final judgment on the civil compensation part of the 2007 Beijing bus conductor strangling the daughter of a Tsinghua University professor, the appellate court overturned the first-instance judgment awarding 100,000 yuan for mental distress and changed it to 300,000 yuan. This is the highest amount of compensation for mental distress awarded by a Chinese court to date.

The Tort Liability Law's provision on "compensation for mental distress" is a legislative progress, but it should also be recognized that this is only principled legislation. How to determine mental distress, under what circumstances it constitutes compensation for mental distress, and how much compensation for mental distress should be awarded are not explicitly provided. Notably, first, the Tort Liability Law strictly limits compensation for mental distress to infringements on personal rights and interests, which include infringements on others' rights to life, health, reputation, privacy, etc., but do not include property rights and interests. Second, regarding what degree can constitute compensation for mental distress, the Tort Liability Law uses "serious mental distress" to define it, but how to determine the degree of "serious" is a key issue. In principle, minor mental distress cannot claim compensation for mental distress; otherwise, litigation costs will increase significantly. This issue will be left to the Supreme People's Court to issue special judicial interpretations and to be clarified through individual cases in practice.