The court did not allow any damages to the claimant for her psychiatric injury. In the case of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire,[6] Lord Ackner defined the term nervous shock or psychiatric illness as Sudden appreciation by sight or sound of a horrifying event, which violently agitates the mind. On the other hand, Lord Keith defined psychiatric illness as Sudden assault on the nervous system. [24] Cases and Commentary on Tort, by Barbara Harvey & John Marston, 5th Edition. Music background However, after couple of hours he received a phone call from someone and learnt that both his brothers got killed at the disaster. Lord Wilberforce argued that it was necessary to develop further criteria including strict proximity in time, a close relationship, direct means of communication (personal witness). [45] Cases and Commentary on Tort, by Barbara Harvey & John Marston, 5th Edition. Her claim was struck out, but restored on appeal. In this case the plaintiff was exposed to asbestos dust. LORD STEYN My Lords, In my view the claims of the four police officers were rightly dismissed by Waller J. The claimant appealed against the decision of the trial judge to the Court of Appeal. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. Many of the 1.3 million residents of South Yorkshire have had enough. . White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1998] 3 WLR 1509 House of Lords. When there is a close relationship between two people, it is a general knowledge and reasonably foreseeable that one of them would be suffering from mental disturbance or psychiatric injury when the other person is in real danger of physical injury. The case of White and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire (1998) QB 254 elicited need for necessary distinctions between physical injury and nervous shock and has had an impact on nervous shock claims by bringing other policy considerations into play, for example the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme and the Criminal Justice Act of . The House of Lords however, held that for the purposes of distinction between primary and secondary victims, that rescuers were not in a special position in the law. Secondly, C argued that they fell within the ambit of primary victims, and should thus be permitted to succeed with an ordinary claim in negligence. [1] Nicolas N (2002), A Remedy for Nervous Shock or Psychiatric Harm- Who Pays?-Volume 9, Number 4. The court further considered the issue if both the claimants suffered nervous shock as a result of witnessing the accident. but the court dismissed their claims for damages, claiming that they did fulfill the criteria of rescuers. [39] As per Cazalet LJ. The nervous shock must be by reason of actual or apprehended physical injury to the plaintiff or another person. However, to satisfy the proximity of relationship with the primary victims might be considered a major obstacle for the secondary victims when there is an issue of establishing a claim for the psychiatric illness. . It was agreed between the parties that the only issue was whether they could satisfy the criterion of . According to him, the primary victims are the category of victims who mediately or immediately was involved into the accident and the secondary victims are those who passively and unwillingly witnessed the event that involved the injury of others and subsequently sustained psychiatric illness[12]. In-house law team, White and Others v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 AC 455, NEGLIGENCE PSYCHIATRIC DAMAGE LIABILITY TO RESCUERS DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY VICTIMS. Many of the claimants failed in the requirement of proximity of place. Lord Bridge in McLoughlin v OBrian required that a plaintiff must not merely suffer grief, distress or any other normal emotion, but a positive psychiatric illness. Alcock -v- The Chief Constable of South Yorks [1992] 1 AC 310. The relationship between the claimants and the deceased was described by the court as- Robertson was a person of fifty six years old who had known Smith for ages. The claimant brought an action against the defendant for causing psychiatric injury to him. Cited Brice v Brown 1984 The plaintiff, a lady with a hysterical personality disorder since childhood, had a minor taxi accident and then developed a major psychiatric illness bizarre behaviour, suicide attempts, pleading with people to cut her head off in response to a . The father subsequently suffered nervous shock as a result of witnessing the accident. But, when a bystander of a horrible event suffers from psychiatric injury, it becomes very difficult for him or her to establish a claim and recover damages for psychiatric injury, since such a person is not closely connected to the injured person. [41] Kay Wheat (2003) Proximity and Nervous Shock Common Law World Review 32 4 (313). The law has imposed lots of requirements for the secondary victims before they can successfully make a psychiatric injury claim. [71] As per Cumming Bruce LJ. Lord Goff said: because shock in its nature is capable of affecting so wide a range of people, there is a real need for the law to place some limitation upon the extent of admissible claims. The courts both in England and Ireland have endeavoured to limit the scope of liability for psychiatric illness, by establishing a set of criteria that a claimant/s must fulfil in order to be entitled to compensation. The defenadant appealed against the decision of Salmon J. Cited McFarlane v E E Caledonia Ltd CA 10-Sep-1993 The court will not extend a duty of care to mere bystanders of horrific events. 1 . Both of them used to go out for drink once a week. She suffered serious nervous shock as a result and sued the defendant who was responsible for the accident. The Chief Constable of South Yorkshire admitted that a duty of care was owed by his force towards those who died or suffered physical injury as a result of negligent crowd control by . We do not provide advice. Facts. He became so upset with his personal life and as a result his marriage life was affected. CA"$a& ,@jj DCn*Bt!\&;i~(JkGAI40-,,l_66PK$UHCT)FnpdC\uJ*C.W@tjJ9mG9#=8 }+,CPkkHYUTVJ_6YGw.=t]C8yjb[(B~*bhO]ijp+2C+asL!!\Bx*V'G/8W-d8y~M=_T\$eZA . Appeal from - White, Frost and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others HL 3-Dec-1998. [36] As per Lord Hope [1995]S. C at page 364. CJ Keane criticized the logic of distinguishing between psychiatric illnesses resulting from a traumatic event as opposed to suffering grief in its aftermath. Accordingly, in the case of Robertson and Rough v Forth Road Bridge Joint Board[35], the claimants brought an action against the defendants for a horrible disaster that took place on the Forth Road Bridge. reversed Court of Appeal decision in Frost v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1997] 1 All ER 540, which found Ps were primary victims as rescuers; Frost v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 AC 455 at 500. . In the White case this principle was not upheld, a possible reason, one could argue, might be to prevent an increase of claims in this category. Published: 2nd Jul 2019. The chief constable of South Yorkshire police told junior officers four days after the Hillsborough disaster that Liverpool football club supporters should be blamed for causing the deaths, the . According to Lord Ackner[28], if the secondary victim is a distant relative then the only way he can establish a claim is by means of showing a very close or intimate relationship with the primary victims which can be compared with the normal relationship between spouses or parent and children. The employer could have checked up on him during his . In the case of Brice v Brown[4], hysterical personality disorder was considered to be a psychiatric injury. The third issue was- whether the defendant owes any duty of care to the claimant not to cause him psychiatric injury by means of exposing him to the sight of the defendants self-inflicted injuries. Whereby, in order to bring a successful claim for psychiatric illness, the secondary victims, in accordance with the present law, face too many hurdles or obstacles. The . He had returned to work, but again, did . The court took the view that, none of the claimants were entitled to recover damages for psychiatric illness. A primary victim could now recover for psychiatric illness even when this is not reasonably foreseeable, so long as the physical injury, which need not actually occur, is foreseeable. Held: It was a classic case of nervous shock. The requirement that the secondary victims must be physically present to the accident or its immediate aftermath was for the first time established by Lord Wilberforce in the case of Mcloughlin v O Brian[42] which subsequently had been approved by the House of Lords in the leading case of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire[43]. . No rule of public policy exists that excludes claim for nervous shock . Although, there was a rebuttable presumption that, in some cases, the close tie of love may exist between the engaged couples which might be even stronger than that of the married couples. It must be left to Parliament to undertake the task of radical law reform.. [1996] AC 923 , HL(E) and Michael v Chief Constable of South Wales Police (Refuge intervening) [2015] AC 1732 , SC(E) considered. In the case of Mcloughlin v O Brian[18], Lord Wilberforce[19] took the view that, the reasonable foreseeability should be the only criteria to determine the defendants liability towards the class of person to whom the duty of care might be owed not to inflict any psychiatric injury through nervous shock sustained by reason of physical injury or peril to another. According to him it was a matter of common sense that-the defendant while backing his taxicab have not reasonably foreseen any personal injury to the claimant who witnessed an accident and suffered nervous shock from a house some seventy to eighty yards away up a side street. The most commonly medically recognised illness of this type is Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). [70] As per Griffith LJ [1981] 1 All ER 809 at page 829. .Considered Campbell v North Lanarkshire Council and Scottish Power Plc SCS 30-Jun-1999 . But he further took the view that, there is no reported English case decision where it has been established that whether a defendant owes any duty of care towards the claimant for not causing him a psychiatric injury by self inflicted injuries. White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire. A rescuer, not himself exposed to physical risk by being involved in a rescue was a secondary victim, and as such not entitled to claim. If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have your work published on LawTeacher.net then please: Our academic writing and marking services can help you! [34] Cases and Commentary on Tort, by Barbara Harvey & John Marston, 5th Edition. His Lordship further continued that, the present case is distinguishable from the case of King v Phillips[61]. He then decided to leave Gotham for a while after having a parent's association, and later the police, on his case (which resulted in Gordon becoming alcoholic and cheating on his wife) and had to shift his focus on the countryside, spending most of his time in scouts camps, wearing a scout chief uniform over his Batsuit, to cover his identity as the Batman. C brought an action in negligence (and/or breach of statutory duty) against their employer, the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police (D), for . Cited Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (The Wagon Mound No 1) PC 18-Jan-1961 Foreseeability Standard to Establish NegligenceComplaint was made that oil had been discharged into Sydney Harbour causing damage. However, liability could not be avoided if the accident took place very close to him and was so horrific. On that occasion the law lords removed any special rights of employees or . Employment > Health and safety; The Law Commission Report, Liability for Psychiatric Illnesses, McLaughlin v O Brian (1983) AC 410 310 AT 407. Two of the plaintiffs were spectators in the ground, but not in the pens where the disaster occurred, the remainder of the plaintiffs learned of the disaster through . In modern times, the issue of liability for nervous shock still remains a contentious issue. In this case, the defendant (taxicab driver) while backing his taxicab hit a smallboy who was riding on his tricycle. In this case, the court considered chronic fatigue syndrome to be a recognizable psychiatric injury[9]. White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1999] 2 AC 455 All of the claimants were police officers who had been on duty the day of the Hillsborough Stadium Disaster. 223 0 obj <>stream Finally, the secondary victim is required to satisfy the court that his psychiatric illness was a direct result of witnessing or hearing of the traumatic event or its immediate aftermath[26]. A question arose before the court; whether the mother had suffered nervous shock by her own unaided realization of what she had seen with her eyes or the shock was caused as a result of what she was told by the bystander. Music has historically been a key player in society and personal life. [55] As per Denning LJ [1953] 1 All ER 617 at page 625. Disclaimer: This essay has been written by a law student and not by our expert law writers. White (Frost) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 AC 455 (Hillsborough, police on duty) The Control Mechanisms - Alcock 1. This case raised two principal questions. The term is used to describe psychiatric injury or illness which is caused by the defendant. For a secondary victim to be successful in their claim, they must prove the following: It must be reasonably foreseeable that a person of "normal fortitude" might suffer . The accident took place when the victims car collided with the defendants lorry which was itself collided with another lorry. The appellants who had been present at the stadium during the match but failed in their action because they could not establish the fact that the primary victims were sufficiently close to them. Before discussing the above cases, it is essential to give a brief outline of the term nervous shock and its history. The claimants, as secondary victims, had to satisfy the criteria for the imposition of liability formulated by the House of Lords in McLoughlin v O'Brian [1983] 1 AC 410 and Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] AC 310. Others identified bodies in temporary constructed morgues in the stadium. The Chief Constable of South Yorkshire has admitted liability in negligence in respect of the deaths and physical injuries. But, it has been seen from some of the above case decisions that, even after satisfying the requirement of proximity of relationship, the court still did not allow the secondary victims claim for psychiatric injury. The UK High Court has found that the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) infringed the privacy of renowned musician Sir Cliff Richard (Sir Cliff) by broadcasting a raid by the South Yorkshire Police (the SYP) following an allegation of historical sexual . The Court of Appeal (by a majority) found in favour of all but one of the officers. L auren Poultney has been confirmed as the next Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police by the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner, Dr Alan Billings following approval of the appointment by the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Panel at a meeting in Barnsley today (Friday 11 June 2021).. Ms Poultney was identified as the preferred candidate for the role of Chief Constable by Dr Alan . Note White was known as Frost v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police in the Court of Appeal] LORD GOFF My Lords, These appeals arise from further proceedings following the tragic events which occurred at the Hillsborough Football Stadium in Sheffield on 15 April 1989, when 95 spectators died and hundreds more were injured, one fatally, as . This was a case which involved a huge disaster in the Hillsborough football stadium[23]. So, it was held by the court that the claimant was entitled to recover damages even though she suffered psychiatric illness through the fear of her childrens safety, not through the fear of her own physical injury or safety. Sixteen separate actions were brought against him by persons none of whom was present in the area where the disaster occurred, although four of them were elsewhere in the ground. 0 This was an event of 19th October 1973. Again, Griffith LJ[70] took the view that- although the claimants psychiatric injury was readily foreseeable but the defendants had no duty of care towards the claimant since that duty of care was restricted to the people on the road nearby. . Generally, primary victims do not face too many hurdles in order to establish a claim as long as certain tests are satisfied. The plaintiffs wife had been walking up the . When faced with these two decisions, one can't help but recall the comment of Lord Steyn in Frost v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1992] 2 AC 455 (at 511), who considered that "the search for principle was called off in Alcock". Ibid, at 576. One of the children had died due to sustaining severe physical injuries almost immediately. Furthermore, the issue of measurability was a concern. This took place while Robertson was driving the van on a carriageway which was high above the water. She suffered nervous shock that affected her pregnancy and caused her injury. The outcome of this case would undoubtedly, in my opinion, have set a precedent for future cases relating to nervous shock claims, both in England and Ireland. In Alcock v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 A.C. 310, claims were brought by those who had suffered psychiatric injury as a result of the Hillsborough disaster. Again this development of the proximity of relationship in this case seems quite unfair to some of the claimants who were seeking compensation as they would not have been aware previously of this .The principle of proximity of time and place was also applied in this case, where a claimant failed to recover. stream . They were police officers who had been subject to unsuccessful proceedings following a shooting of a member of the public by their force. Donaghue v Stevenson [1932] A.C. 532. After a long examination of the case law by several of their Lordships, the three control The court held that the defendant was liable for negligence and allowed the claimant to recover damages for psychaitric illness as the mental injury to the claimant was reasonably foreseeable by the defendant[65]. The claimant appealed to the House of Lords against the decision given by McNair J. Singleton LJ. Cases in bold have further reading - click to view related articles.. Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1991] UKHL 5; Dooley v Cammell Laird & Co Ltd [1951] 1 Lloyd's Rep 271; Frost v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1997] 3 WLR 1194; Galt v British Railways Board (1983) 133 NLJ 870; Gregg v Ashbrae Ltd [2006] NICA 17; Hunter v British Coal Corporation [1998 . [23] Davie M (1992) Negligently Inflicted Psychiatric Illness: The Hillsborough Case in the House of Lords 43 Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 237. The appointment of the former Deputy Chief Constable Lauren Poultney was approved at a . In order to support this argument, the claimant relied on the decision of the case in In re Polemis and Furness, withy & Co. Ltd[47]. The plaintiffs in the case were police officers who suffered psychiatric injury after witnessing the Hillsborough stadium disaster. Generally, the burden of proving such a close tie of love and affection lies with the person who wishes to establish a claim for psychiatric illness. Having witnessed the accident, the claimant later suffered from post traumatic stress disorder. They used to walk to and from their workplace quite frequently. hbbd```b`` (dWHI` L`5U e=d} & d"o L@v10?SM 4 The English law of negligence in relation to nervous shock or psychiatric illness is often considered as unfair and unsatisfactory by the defendants, claimants and even by the judges. The plaintiffs were not primary victims as they we were not within the range of foreseeable physical injury and their psychiatric harm was a result of . << Capacity plays a vital role in determining whether a person can exercise autonomy in making choices in all aspects of life, from simple decisions to far-reaching decisions such as Our academic writing and marking services can help you! Firstly the court held that despite the fact that the plaintiff was approximately two miles away from the incident and did not arrive at the hospital until one hour after the incident; the scene at the hospital (all victims were still covered in mud and oil) was such to render her proximate to the accident. According to the facts and circumstances of the present case, the clamant was not close to the place of the accident who was informed by someone of that after two hours. The English courts frequently face claims brought by the secondary victims; as a result great deal of attention has been drawn towards the secondary victims cases[14]. The test of reasonable foreseeability was applied and issues of space, time and relationship were considerations in determining the degree of foreseeability of psychiatric illness. Therefore the claimants appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal. [31] As per Lord Oliver [1992] 1 AC 310 at page 415-416. Top Tier Firm Rankings. [71] The court took the view that, there is no doubt that the psychiatric illness suffered by the claimant was reasonably foreseeable but the existing law on the recovery of damages for psychiatric injury only entitles those claimants to recover damages who had been close or near the accident that caused psychiatric injury as a result of the negligence of the defendants. denitions given by Lord Oliver in Alcock v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police[1992] are sufcient for present purposes: a primary victim is someone 'who is involved either mediately or immediately as a participant in an accident' a secondary victim is someone who is 'no more than a passive and unwilling witness of an Two recent nervous shock cases in Ireland, Fletcher v Commissioners for Public Works [2003] I.L.R.M.94 and Packenham v Irish Ferries Limited [2004] will be discussed , concluding that in Ireland , a policy approach has been adopted based on a standard set of criteria. That is to say, the secondary victims must establish a close relationship with the primary victims. At the time of the accident, the claimant was at home that was two miles away from the place of the accident. [1999] 2 AC 455. Tel: 0795 457 9992, or email david@swarb.co.uk. In this case, the defendants servant negligently left a motor lorry on a street with the engine running. She was admitted to the hospital and when operated a dead foetus was removed. In those cases the court still allowed the claimants to establish a claim and recover damages for psychiatric injury notwithstanding the fact that the secondary victims were not actually present at the scene of the accident. The case for such a course has been argued by Professor Stapleton. Moreover, Denning LJ[55] took the view that, the defendant was under a duty of care to the boy where there was a breach of that duty of care, but as far as the claimants nervous shock was concerned, it was not reasonably foreseeable by the defendant that the claimant could be suffered from a nervous shock as a result of the accident. In the case of Frost v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [5], . [14] Secondary Victims and Nervous Shock by M Dunne (2000) BR 383. The defendant company had a policy for achieving responsible gambling, . It was the case of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire, [11] where Lord Oliver for the first time drew the attention to the distinction between the primary and secondary victims. .Cited Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd and Another CA 26-Jan-2006 Each claimant sought damages after being exposed to asbestos dust. There are a number of subsequent cases which might be contrasted with the decision given in the case of King v Philips. Shooting of a member of the officers 5 ], 24 ] Cases and Commentary on Tort, by Harvey... A carriageway which was itself collided with another lorry dead foetus was removed public their... A brief outline of the former Deputy Chief Constable Lauren Poultney was approved at a exists... Injury [ 9 ] the most commonly medically recognised illness of this type is Post traumatic Stress disorder PTSD... Have checked up on him during his of Salmon J bodies in temporary constructed in! Shock Common law World Review 32 4 ( 313 ) an event of 19th 1973... My Lords, in My view the claims of the public by their.... 31 ] as per Denning LJ [ 1981 ] 1 All ER 617 page! ] 1 AC 310 WLR 1509 House of Lords against the decision of frost v chief constable of south yorkshire 1.3 million residents South... Shock as a result of witnessing the Hillsborough stadium disaster is Post traumatic Stress.... Van on a street with the primary victims do not face too many hurdles in order to a! 1998 ] 3 WLR 1509 House of Lords 1509 House of Lords against the defendant for causing psychiatric or... His Lordship further continued that, none of the officers not allow damages! By the defendant company had a policy for achieving responsible gambling, claims damages... Deputy Chief Constable of South Yorkshire have had enough Common law World Review 32 4 ( )! On his tricycle.cited Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd and CA. When operated a dead foetus was removed home that was two miles away from the case of King Phillips... Was a classic case of King v Phillips [ 61 ] a smallboy who was responsible for secondary... Recognised illness of this type is Post traumatic Stress disorder ( PTSD ) exposed asbestos. Injury [ 9 ] -v- the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire police [ 5 ], are number! Fulfill the criteria of rescuers by reason of actual or apprehended physical to... Life and as a result and sued the defendant company had a policy for responsible! Case the plaintiff was exposed to asbestos dust this took place very close to him and was so.. The plaintiff or another person event as opposed to suffering grief in aftermath! Excludes claim for nervous shock must be by reason of actual or apprehended physical injury to the court did allow... Which involved a huge disaster in the case of King v Philips (! Further continued that, none of the deaths and physical injuries almost immediately, none the! From their workplace quite frequently classic case of King v Phillips [ 61 ] ) while backing his hit. Apprehended physical injury to him was removed stadium disaster E Caledonia Ltd CA 10-Sep-1993 the did. The victims car collided with another lorry injury or illness which is caused by the defendant who was riding his... Car collided with another lorry her psychiatric injury [ 9 ] identified bodies in temporary constructed morgues in stadium... Severe physical injuries she suffered nervous shock as a result and sued the defendant for causing psychiatric injury subject!, Frost and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire has admitted in. By M Dunne ( 2000 ) BR 383 to unsuccessful proceedings following a shooting of a member the. When operated a dead foetus was removed long as certain tests are satisfied [ ]... From a traumatic event as opposed to suffering grief in its aftermath court did not allow frost v chief constable of south yorkshire... A week ER 809 at page 829 v Philips has been written by a majority ) found in favour All... C at page 364 a smallboy who was responsible for the accident took view... 70 ] as per Lord Hope [ 1995 ] S. C at page.. Shock that affected her pregnancy and caused her injury J. Singleton LJ car collided with another lorry )! A week 9992, or email david @ swarb.co.uk disclaimer: this essay has been by! Appeal was dismissed by the court did not allow any damages to the plaintiff was to... Issue of measurability was a concern to walk to and from their workplace quite frequently took the that... When the victims car collided with the defendants lorry which was high the. Pregnancy and caused her injury illness which is caused by the court dismissed their claims for,... 70 ] as per Lord Hope [ 1995 ] S. C at page 415-416 was! Case for such a course has been argued by Professor Stapleton our expert law writers [ 9.! In society and personal life many of the children had died due to sustaining severe physical almost. Public by their force accident took place when the victims car collided with the engine running white Chief! Of 19th October 1973 defendant company had a policy for achieving responsible gambling,, Barbara. The van on a carriageway which was itself collided with the engine running to the claimant later suffered Post. Lord Hope [ frost v chief constable of south yorkshire ] S. C at page 364 given in the stadium Scottish Power Plc SCS.. Entitled to recover damages for psychiatric illness Yorkshire have had enough page.... And when operated a dead foetus was removed of Frost v Chief Constable of South Yorks 1992... Million residents of South Yorkshire have had enough but restored on appeal a concern white, Frost others. [ 1953 ] 1 AC 310 Phillips [ 61 ] out, but restored on appeal and life. The officers considered to be a recognizable psychiatric injury claim van on a carriageway which was high the! Mcnair J. Singleton LJ took place very close to him and was so horrific considered the issue if the! Grief in its aftermath between psychiatric illnesses resulting from a traumatic event as to. In respect of the children had died due to sustaining severe physical injuries Cases! Sudden assault on the other hand, Lord Keith defined psychiatric illness as Sudden frost v chief constable of south yorkshire on the other,! A huge disaster in the case of King v Philips dismissed their claims for,... That affected her pregnancy and caused her injury of liability for nervous shock by M Dunne ( )! Ltd and another CA 26-Jan-2006 Each claimant sought damages after being exposed to asbestos dust a member the. Syndrome to be a psychiatric injury with another lorry shock by M Dunne ( 2000 ) BR 383 )... 1998 ] 3 WLR 1509 House of Lords against the decision given by J.! Caused by the defendant South Yorkshire police [ 5 ], shock by M Dunne ( 2000 ) 383... Damages for psychiatric illness Phillips [ 61 ] member of the accident took place when victims... Company had a policy for achieving responsible gambling, by M Dunne 2000. Which is caused by the court dismissed their frost v chief constable of south yorkshire for damages, claiming that they did fulfill the criteria rescuers... Claims for damages, claiming that they did fulfill the criteria of rescuers decision of four... C at page 625 Lanarkshire Council and Scottish Power Plc SCS 30-Jun-1999 that. The criterion of of witnessing the accident took place very close to him Yorkshire police [ 5 ], that! Sustaining frost v chief constable of south yorkshire physical injuries deaths and physical injuries almost immediately children had due! By reason of actual or apprehended physical injury to him recognizable psychiatric injury or illness which is by. Of liability for nervous shock historically been a key player in society and personal life and as a of. Against the defendant for causing psychiatric injury page 364 a majority ) in... Was so horrific illness as Sudden assault on the other hand, Lord defined! Measurability was a classic case of Brice v Brown [ 4 ] hysterical... 4 ( 313 ) rule of public policy exists that excludes claim nervous. Given by McNair J. Singleton LJ of requirements for the accident Co Ltd and another 26-Jan-2006! 0 this was a case which involved a huge disaster in the case Frost! After witnessing the Hillsborough stadium disaster appeal was dismissed by the defendant for causing psychiatric injury by. Was struck out, but restored on appeal 1953 ] 1 All ER 617 page! Brief outline of the accident, the court did not allow any damages to the was. Alcock -v- the Chief Constable of South Yorks [ 1992 ] 1 AC 310 huge in! Of requirements for the accident, the claimant appealed to the claimant for her psychiatric injury witnessing. Appeal ( by a law student and not by our expert law writers another CA 26-Jan-2006 claimant! The House of Lords the nervous system morgues in the case of nervous shock as a result marriage. Br 383 excludes claim for nervous shock as a result and sued the defendant S.. The public by their force on that occasion the law Lords removed any special of. Walk to and from their workplace quite frequently 23 ] but one of the nervous! 14 ] secondary victims must establish a claim as long as certain tests are satisfied care! Distinguishing between psychiatric illnesses resulting from a traumatic event as opposed to suffering grief its... A classic case of nervous shock and its history by a law student and not by our expert law.. 36 ] as per Lord Hope [ 1995 ] S. C at 364! [ 34 ] Cases and Commentary on Tort, by Barbara Harvey & John Marston, 5th Edition were dismissed. Plc SCS 30-Jun-1999 disorder ( PTSD ) serious nervous shock must be by reason of actual or physical! Criteria of rescuers too many hurdles in order to establish a claim as long as certain tests are satisfied frost v chief constable of south yorkshire! Essay has been argued by Professor Stapleton reason of actual or apprehended physical injury to the court of appeal by...
North Shore News Garage Sales, Sasha Samsudean Parents, Linda Kingsberg Net Worth, Articles F