If we want to remove the moral, conscientious, and fair view from civil liability law and impose theories based on strict and sometimes harsh logic of corrective justice upon it, we must inevitably accept materialization and objectification of legal standards and rules. On the other hand, if we were to introduce fairness, the dryness of corrective justice will undoubtedly be reduced, the rules of civil responsibility would be softened and more flexibly adapted to the specific and concrete circumstances of the parties to the dispute. However, the study of the history of law shows that legal systems have always faced the question of how to resolve, or at least reduce, the conflict or contradiction between the two goals of "materialization" and "humanization" of legal doctrines. By using the analytical and comparative method and by exploiting library resources, the writer will, in this article, show that one of the most important ways to reduce this tension is to use a standard that is considered as a general theory of "hybrid or relative objectivity";