Tort Case Point of law

Psychiatric harm McLoghlin v O’Brian Claimant must ‘establish that he is suffering not merely
(Lord bridge) grief, distress or any other normal emotion, but a
positive psychiatric illness.
Psychiatric harm Hussain v the chief No psychiatric injury when claimant experienced
constable of mercia significant anxiety symptoms at times of stress, including
constabulary numbness and discomfort in his left leg and arm.
Psychiatric harm Page v Smith Reoccurring ME due to accident which could of lead to
(Primary victims) serious injury.
Foreseeable that D behaviour would expose claimant to
risk of physical injury. Duty of care is owed not only in
regard to physical but also psychiatric harm.
Psychiatric harm doesn’t have to be foreseeable
Psychiatric harm Simmons v British Physically injured in workplace, developed skin condition
(Primary victims) Steel  time off work  depressive illness.
Liable for all injuries.
Doesn’t matter that the type of injury wasn’t
foreseeable.
Also doesn’t matter that a victim who was more
psychologically robust might not of been affected in the
same way.
Psychiatric harm White & others v Lord Hoffman refers to a primary victim as victims being
(Primary victims) chief constable of YS ‘within the range of physical injury’
Psychiatric harm CJD group B Claimants given contaminated injections. When told
(Primary victims) claimants v the they may suffer from mad cow decease some suffered
medical research psychiatric harm however not caused by the injections
council themselves but the information given later.
Couldn’t claim as primary or secondary victims.
Claim was allowed due to high proximity between the
parties.
Psychiatric illness reasonably foreseeable.
Psychiatric harm Duddin v the home Psychiatric harm must be foreseeable
(Secondary office Psychiatric injury wasn’t reasonably foreseeable as a
victims) result of a sexually inappropriate conversation between
his wife and a prison officer.
Psychiatric harm Page v Smith Established that to be a secondary victim the psychiatric
(Secondary) harm is foreseeable in a person with a normal fortitude.
Psychiatric harm Liability for ‘Take into account the robustness of the population at
(Secondary psychiatric illness large to psychiatric illness’ in order to establish normal
victims, Normal (1998) law fortitude.
fortitude) commission report
Psychiatric harm Bourhill v Young Severe psychiatric damage after seeing the scene of a
(Secondary fatal car accident.
victims, Normal Person of normal fortitude was expected to cope
fortitude) witnessing the event. Was during wartime, normal
fortitude was higher.
Psychiatric harm Alcock v chief ‘Shock involves the sudden appreciation by sight or
(Secondary constable of s. sound of a horrifying event which violently agitates the
victims, Yorkshire police mind… yet to include psychiatric illness caused by
causation) accumulation over a period of time’
Psychiatric harm Soin v Hampstead Father watched son fall into coma and die.
(Secondary No shock the event carried on for some time and death
victims, was expected.
causation)
Psychiatric harm Ward v the leeds Daughter’s death led to mothers shock.
(Secondary teaching hospitals Shock caused by daughter’s death held that even if
victims, nhs trust. claimant wasn’t at the hospital the same reaction would
causation) of occurred.
Psychiatric harm North Glamorgan Mothers baby son died after mother was present with
(Secondary nhs trust v walters him for 36 hours.
victims) Was regarded as a sudden event
Psychiatric harm Alcock House of Lords held that a claim isn’t sustainable unless
(Secondary (hearness, nearness, the shock had been caused by the claimant hearing or
victims, dearness test) seeing the accident or its immediate aftermath; being
proximity) present at the accident or immediate aftermath; and
having a close relationship of love and affection with the
victim.
Psychiatric harm Alcock Those watching though tv couldn’t claim as broadcasts
(Secondary were modified according to code of ethics, no graphic
victims, scenes of suffering.
proximity)
Psychiatric harm Alcock Seeing body in mortuary 8 hours after accident didn’t
(Secondary qualify as immediate aftermath.
victims,
proximity)
Psychiatric harm Atkinson v Seghal Mother identifying daughter’s mangled body in a
(Secondary mortuary less than 2 hours after being informed of the
victims, death was counted as immediate aftermath.
proximity)
Psychiatric harm McLoughlin v O’Brian Husband and three children in accident.
(Secondary Hour later claimant drove to hospital, found out
victims, youngest was dead and saw untreated injuries of family.
proximity) Suffered depression.
Proximity established as the immediate aftermath was
seen.
Psychiatric harm McCarthy v the chief Showed closeness to his deceased half-brother.
(Secondary constable of s
victims, Yorkshire police
proximity)
Psychiatric harm Alcock Brother couldn’t prove ties of love and affection with
(Secondary two brothers.
victims,
proximity)
Psychiatric harm Alcock No special treatment towards rescuers.
(Secondary
victims, rescuers)
Psychiatric harm W v essex county Foster parents said they didn’t want to foster someone
(Secondary council. of a sexually abusive behaviour.
victims, unwilling Boy they fostered abused their children sexually leading
participants) to psychiatric hard.
Claim allowed against the local council and social worker