However, an action for psychatric injury was brought by the claimant against the defendant and the owners of the garage[57]. Cited Hambrook v Stokes Brothers CA 1925 The defendants employee left a lorry at the top of a steep narrow street unattended, with the engine running and without having taken proper steps to secure it. The law on recovery of damages for psychiatric illness is entirely based on common law. . The boy screamed loud enough and tried to take his foot out the cars wheel by kicking the car with the other foot. Facts. In relation to employer/employee relationship and duty of care the courts did not uphold the principles of the above cases. [17] As per Mr. Bankes, Atkin and Sargant L.JJ [1925] 1 K.B 141 at page 142. He continued that, the claimants nervous shock was too remote as a head of damage. l'LCocI2Vp.0c Subsequently, she learnt from a bystander that one of her children have sustained injury by that running motor lorry. 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 . They said that the defendants negligent treatment allowed the attack to take place. The floodgates argument may be a possible reason for this. In my view the only sensible general strategy for the courts is to say thus far and no further. [41] Kay Wheat (2003) Proximity and Nervous Shock Common Law World Review 32 4 (313). Byrne v Southern and Western RY .Co. The children had severe head and face injuries, concussion and fractures. . [39] that- the defendant did not owe any duty of care towards the claimant for not causing a psychiatric injury by self inflicted physical injuries. Abstract. However, during the journey, a very strong wind thrown the metal sheet and Smith away while he was sitting on top of it. The question was whether, having regard to the fact that she had suffered sorrow and grief it would not be to . In 1997, the claimant initiated an action for psychiatric illness against the defendant. .Cited Mullaney v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police CA 15-May-2001 The claimant police officer was severely injured making an arrest. Baker v Bolton [1808] EWHC KB J92. . They could only recover if they were exposed to physical danger as primary victims. 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 case of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire[22]is the best example which provided the criteria for recovery of psychiatric injury claims by the secondary victims. In this case, notwithstanding the fact that the claimant arrived in to the hospital with a view to see her injured family membrs after two hours, the House of Lords still recognized that as an immediate aftermath. In a subsequent case, Packenham v Irish Ferries Limited this principle was upheld and damages were not awarded as there was no recognized psychiatric illness. Bourhill v Young[49] was a case of Edinborough fishwife who suffered nervous shock as a result of the negligence of the defendant motorcyclist who brought about a collision and made the claimant so upset that she had a miscarriage. Many of the claimants failed in the requirement of proximity of place. [9] NJ Mullany, Psychiatric damage in the House of Lords- Fourth time Unlucky: Page v Smith (1995) 3 Journal of Law and Medicine 112. u $VnI=vJ--EmC\A$2Tat9iamg~>k,H7^V TJ=7jdv'6M:c 7c{}N8o}~p7k;? v The Chief Constable Of South Yorkshire Police ( [1997]1 All E R.540), their Lordships holding by a majority of 3 to 2 that the claims of the police officers had been rightly dismissed by the trial judge . 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. During this period in society there was a view that people of strong moral character did not succumb to their emotions. Lord Morton of Henryton: it has never been the law of England that an invitor, who has negligently but unintentionally injured an invitee, is liable to compensate other persons who . Sir Cliff Richard OBE V The British Broadcasting Corporation; The Chief Constable Of South Yorkshire Police [2018] EWHC 1837 (Ch) Summary. 1 . The best example is Boardman and Another v Sanderson and Another[56]. 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. View examples of our professional work here. The very moment Smith was being thrown off the van by the wind, Robertson did not in fact see what happened as he was driving. In modern times, the issue of liability for nervous shock still remains a contentious issue. Music background The lorry ran violently down the hill. The House considered claims by police officers who had suffered psychiatric injury after tending the victims of the Hillsborough tragedy. However, these two categories of secondary victims are exceptionally allowed to recover at common law even without a close tie of love and affection between them and the immediate victims, as required of other secondary victims. In this case, Lord Oliver[29] took the view that-Brian Harrison, one of the appellants, lost his two brothers but still failed in his action in spite of his presence in the stadium, because he produced no evidence of close tie of love with his two brothers. In the case of Benson v Lee[62], the claimant was informed that her son had an accident and sustained injuries. Once the requirement of proximity of relationship is satisfied, the secondary victims must also establish the facts that he had physical proximity to the accident or its immediate aftermath. The . I conclude by wholeheartedly agreeing with Lord Steyns statement that The Law on the recovery of compensation for pure psychiatric harm is a patchwork quilt of distinctions which are difficult to justify and I feel, the cases discussed in this essay clearly support my viewpoint. Donaghue v Stevenson [1932] A.C. 532. At that time she was three of four months advanced in pregnancy. Many of the claimants witnessed horrific images and scenes of carnage on the television . Cited - Alcock and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police HL 28-Nov-1991. The defendant argued that, there was no negligence on his part as far as the claimants psychiatric illness was concerned. CJ Keane criticized the logic of distinguishing between psychiatric illnesses resulting from a traumatic event as opposed to suffering grief in its aftermath. Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. Case summaries. Recovery, on the other hand, for a secondary victim is differentiated and is much more restricted. . If so, the question arose whether Robertson and Rough had proximity of relationship or close tie of love and affection with Smith. Keywords: rescue; compensation for hillsborough rescuers. The defendants car was standing inside the garage and he started backing the car out of the garage. Held: It was a classic case of nervous shock. The caimant was summoned by the hospital authority in order to see her injured family members. The carriageway was too high that any person fell from that distance would unlikely to survive. Many of the 1.3 million residents of South Yorkshire have had enough. Similarly there are some other cases where the claimants were not actually present at the scene of the accident but the court still held the defendant liable for negligently inflicting psychaitric injury to the claimants. Disclaimer: This dissertation has been written by a student and is not an example of our professional work, which you can see examples of here. Regretted Page v Smith HL 12-May-1995 The plaintiff was driving his car when the defendant turned into his path. There are a number of subsequent cases which might be contrasted with the decision given in the case of King v Philips. Hearing about it from someone else would not suffice. The defendant admitted that he had been negligent, but said he was not liable for the psychiatric damage as it was unforeseeable and therefore not recoverable as a head of damage .The Page v Smith case is significant in that it enhanced the distinction between primary and secondary victims. The plaintiff must show that the defendant owed duty of care not to cause the reasonably foreseeable nervous shock. The court further considered the issue if both the claimants suffered nervous shock as a result of witnessing the accident. *595 Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police. You should not treat any information in this essay as being authoritative. had introduced the Special Rule . Packenham v Irish Ferries . White v Chief Constable of the Yorkshire Police [1998] 3 WLR 1509. Held: The claim failed: these claimants have no . [10] Kay Wheat (1998), Liability of psychiatric illness- the Law Commission Report Journal of Personal Injury Litigation. However, as far as their claim for psychiatric illness was concerned, the court was neither convinced with the surrounding facts and circumstances that there was sufficient close tie of love and affection with the claimants and the primary victim nor was convinced that the psychiatric illness that they had sustained was reasonably foreseeable by the defendant in accordance with the recovery criteria for psychiatric illness established in the leading case of Alcock. 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. 2819 Words. 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. As soon as she arrived to the hospital, she was informed that her youngest daughter was killed. Since they were not endangered in the discharge of their service or in rescuing, as employees and/or rescuers, the police officers were only secondary victims. The claimants (C) were all police officers who had been on duty within Hillsborough Stadium during the eponymous disaster, in which 95 Liverpool FC fans were killed and many others injured. The most recent of which was Frost v The Chief Constable of South Yorkshire which resulted from the Hillsborough tragedy. Published: 2nd Jul 2019. X CsGPL)8eDD(!#V+x 6g9%RlTJ%R "XL9$Q)pTFb%irDs!(;wx*9y_yr:!,y|(*ch1Y.qT%f#R4xSn"4;I.lMO.d==Z:B|dU6t()M.|^~,fmO'8\W?O@OVC\%rESn,IPx$|`S|}KBn|oX]vhaa\]ncWi=tMGcvg7v~M&ClWAb]n~_uuzAU60\T!lnV_ '0HPT l#H:+pQ )cmlu-'46:ut(:&:h 1=i?|\A dY;dzCP(@QD}XMSV/bVS:|x(v@7|, ,mFFL [g59gNqTeB@)V&l33%f@)6a87<>Vb3{,>gkWBPz|}y.H%g -m(-1HN]>0Ns6t Z~\ L6M 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. Section A The codification of directors duties was an unnecessary step. He had known Smith just as a colleague for few years. Kearns J [2003] stated the category of relationships entitled to successfully claim damages for nervous shock should be tightly restricted.. However the crash did result in a recurrence of magic encephalomyelitis (Chronic fatigue syndrome) from which he had suffered for 20 years but was then in remission. .Cited Johnston v NEI International Combustion Ltd; Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd; similar HL 17-Oct-2007 The claimant sought damages for the development of neural plaques, having been exposed to asbestos while working for the defendant. Firstly, it fell to be determined whether an employer owed a duty of care to protect their employees from psychiatric injuries they may incur in the course of their employment. However, in this case, their Lordship took the similar opinion that, the issue of proximity of relationship should be decided on a case by case basis. During a major football match in the Hillsborough ground, one part of the football stadium was crashed because the South Yorkshire police allowed an excessively large number of spectators in that part of the stadium which was already full. Up until the early 20th century in England, courts have been reluctant to allow recovery for nervous shock. He suffered a mental breakdown in 1986, and had four months off work. Ibid, at 576. hbbd```b`` (dWHI` L`5U e=d} & d"o L@v10?SM 4 At the trial, Branson J. took the opinion that, the claimant will not be entitled to establish a claim for nervous shock and recover any kind of damages if she had not suffered the shock through the fear of her own safety. A live television broadcast of that match was running from the ground. 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. Having studied this case, I feel it is significant for a number of reasons. There are many examples where it has been seen that a person after sustaining a genuine shock could not recover damages for psychiatric illness only because of being failure to establish the fact that there was sufficient close relationship with the primary 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. Looking for a flexible role? He took the view that, since the claimant was watching the scene of the accident from quite a few distances away, so it was not reasonably foreseeable by the defendant that if he backed his taxicab negligently the claimant would suffer a nervous shock. Tel: 0795 457 9992, or email david@swarb.co.uk. Such cases highlight to me, that recovery for damages relating to nervous shock, is probably one of the most controversial and complex areas of modern law. The Court of Appeal upheld the judgement that was delivered by Boreham J but on different ground. Courts said the following elements are necessary to establish liability for nervous shock The plaintiff must establish that he suffered a recognizable psychiatric illness, the illness must have been shock induced; caused by the defendants act or omission. In order to establish a claim and recover damages for psychiatric illness the secondary victims must satisfy the proximity of relationship[15]. Over the years as claims have increased, while it is arguable, for a need for criteria to be developed , to prevent a floodgate of claims , one has to feel that some of the decisions , particularly in relation to cases such as Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police , appear to be particularly harsh , in respect of the claimants. *You can also browse our support articles here >. Such a relationship which is full of close tie and affection may be presumed to exist into the familial relationship or close friendship. To satisfy physical proximity to the accident or its immediate aftermath might be considered as another major obstacle for the secondary victims where there is an issue of establishing a claim for the psychiatric illness. 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. It must be left to Parliament to undertake the task of radical law reform.. The House of Lords (by a majority) in Page v Smith, enhanced the recovery of the primary victim over the secondary victim. Frost v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police [1997] 3 WLR 1194. The married mother-of-one began her policing career in 1998 with Humberside Police and joined South Yorkshire Police in 2017 as Assistant Chief Constable. Abstract. Another appellant, namely Robert Alcock, was present on the ground during the football match and witnessed the whole disaster from the west stand of the stadium. C brought an action in negligence (and/or breach of statutory duty) against their employer, the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police (D), for the psychiatric harm they had suffered as a result of witnessing the tragedy first-hand. II. Precedent rules out this course and, in any event, there are cogent policy considerations against such a bold innovation. [1999] 2 AC 455. [60]did not agree with the arguments put by the defendant but he agreed with the decision given by Salmon J. Among all the claimants, thirteen people lost either their relatives or friends because of death. Thus, there could be no duty of care owed to C for purely psychiatric harm, as they were not at any point in any physical danger. Held: Being directly involved, the pursuer was a primary victim, and accordingly not subject to the limits on claiming for . 669. [7] Again, Hoffman L.J in the case of Page v Smith[8] defined psychiatric illness as a mental trauma. They were police officers who had been subject to unsuccessful proceedings following a shooting of a member of the public by their force. No rule of public policy exists that excludes claim for nervous shock . swarb.co.uk is published by David Swarbrick of 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire, HD6 2AG. 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. Both of them used to go out for drink once a week. IMPORTANT:This site reports and summarizes cases. In the case of Frost v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [5], . Pages 14 Course Hero uses AI to attempt to automatically extract content from documents to surface to you and others so you can study better, e.g., in search results, to enrich docs, and more. 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 . A number of claimants had witnessed the horrific scenes on the television or had been informed by a third party. The winner - given the power to fire the next chief constable - will inevitably prevail on an anti-corruption ticket. Initially Alcock was not worried about his brother in law as he believed that he would be watching the match from another stand of the stadium which was safe. [15] Kay Wheat (2003) Proximity and Nervous Shock Common Law World Review 32 4 (313). .Considered Campbell v North Lanarkshire Council and Scottish Power Plc SCS 30-Jun-1999 . The Irish courts have been much more responsive in allowing recovery for nervous shock. Mental Health can have a positive or negative impact on our behaviour, decision-making, and actions, as well as our general health and well-being. N>7>@s!z9@-w9Hy^O1? M:fXxKGkYqLfX A Ai>|N_*HbOsu.7B ovRl-#GQcLXH`{70l191X?@j`P02:vKX @9E. The mother was so frightened as soon as she came across the scene. X (Adopted Child: Access To Court File): FC 9 Sep 2014, Frost and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and Others, Alcock and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (The Wagon Mound No 1), Glen and Other v Korean Airlines Company Ltd, Mullaney v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police, McLoughlin v Jones; McLoughlin v Grovers (a Firm), Campbell v North Lanarkshire Council and Scottish Power Plc, Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd and Another, Waters v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, French and others v Chief Constable of Sussex Police, Johnston v NEI International Combustion Ltd; Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd; similar, Zurich Insurance Plc UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd, Paul and Another v The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust, James-Bowen and Others v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis, British Airways Plc v British Airline Pilots Association: QBD 23 Jul 2019, Wright v Troy Lucas (A Firm) and Another: QBD 15 Mar 2019, Hayes v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax Loan Interest Relief Disallowed): FTTTx 23 Jun 2020, Ashbolt and Another v Revenue and Customs and Another: Admn 18 Jun 2020, Indian Deluxe Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Other): FTTTx 5 Jun 2020, Productivity-Quality Systems Inc v Cybermetrics Corporation and Another: QBD 27 Sep 2019, Thitchener and Another v Vantage Capital Markets Llp: QBD 21 Jun 2019, McCarthy v Revenue and Customs (High Income Child Benefit Charge Penalty): FTTTx 8 Apr 2020, HU206722018 and HU196862018: AIT 17 Mar 2020, Parker v Chief Constable of the Hampshire Constabulary: CA 25 Jun 1999, Christofi v Barclays Bank Plc: CA 28 Jun 1999, Demite Limited v Protec Health Limited; Dayman and Gilbert: CA 24 Jun 1999, Demirkaya v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 23 Jun 1999, Aravco Ltd and Others, Regina (on the application of) v Airport Co-Ordination Ltd: CA 23 Jun 1999, Manchester City Council v Ingram: CA 25 Jun 1999, London Underground Limited v Noel: CA 29 Jun 1999, Shanley v Mersey Docks and Harbour Company General Vargos Shipping Inc: CA 28 Jun 1999, Warsame and Warsame v London Borough of Hounslow: CA 25 Jun 1999, Millington v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and Regions v Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council: CA 25 Jun 1999, Chilton v Surrey County Council and Foakes (T/A R F Mechanical Services): CA 24 Jun 1999, Oliver v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 23 Jun 1999, Regina v Her Majestys Coroner for Northumberland ex parte Jacobs: CA 22 Jun 1999, Sheriff v Klyne Tugs (Lowestoft) Ltd: CA 24 Jun 1999, Starke and another (Executors of Brown decd) v Inland Revenue Commissioners: CA 23 May 1995, South and District Finance Plc v Barnes Etc: CA 15 May 1995, Gan Insurance Company Limited and Another v Tai Ping Insurance Company Limited: CA 28 May 1999, Thorn EMI Plc v Customs and Excise Commissioners: CA 5 Jun 1995, London Borough of Bromley v Morritt: CA 21 Jun 1999, Kuwait Oil Tanker Company Sak; Sitka Shipping Incorporated v Al Bader;Qabazard; Stafford and H Clarkson and Company Limited; Mccoy; Kuwait Petroleum Corporation and Others: CA 28 May 1999, Worby, Worby and Worby v Rosser: CA 28 May 1999, Bajwa v British Airways plc; Whitehouse v Smith; Wilson v Mid Glamorgan Council and Sheppard: CA 28 May 1999. Generally, nervous shock is a term which has been used by lawyers. 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. Page -v- Smith [1995] 2 All ER 736 at 759, 761 per Lord Lloyd. However, Mr. Bankes, Atkin and Sargant L.JJ. (White (Frost) v Chief Constable of S Yorks, pp 500 and 511) The Clinical Negligence cases 1. Although, it was admitted by the police constable that they were negligent in performing their duties in the football stadium and it was only because of their negligence the horrible disaster took place which ended the lives of ninety six spectators and caused injury to the other spectators. If you are the original writer of this dissertation and no longer wish to have your work published on the UKDiss.com website then please: Our academic writing and marking services can help you! The case was known as Frost and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police and Others [1997] 1 All ER 540 in the lower courts. 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. The court allowed the claims of Mr. McCarthy as he satisfied the Alcock criteria for recovery of claims for psychiatric illness. [58] that the defendant was in breach of his duty of reasonable care and the claimants were entitled to recover damages. The defendant admitted that they were negligent in relation to the death of her daughter as well as injury to her rest of the family members but simply denied any kind of liabilty for negligently causing psychiatric injury to her. [65] Cases and Commentary on Tort, by Barbara Harvey & John Marston, 5th Edition. He was told however that the risk was very remote. The accident took place when the victims car collided with the defendants lorry which was itself collided with another lorry. Her claim was struck out, but restored on appeal. hb```R !1CFAFCFAAA KP`L%T98;00`8A$B*oAjb 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. C brought an action in negligence (and/or breach of statutory duty) against their employer, the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police (D), for . The boy sustained a very minor injury and the damage to his tricycle was nothing serious. [1981] 1 All ER 809. An action was brought by her husband for the loss of benefit of her services. The Facts. In this case, the court considered chronic fatigue syndrome to be a recognizable psychiatric injury[9]. Unless and until there is clear evidence of having the close relationship or a close tie of love with the person (primary victims) who is injured or within the zone of danger, the court will not allow any claims for psychiatric injury brought by the secondary victims. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. However, the defendants appeal was allowed by the Court of Appeal and on the other hand it did not allow the unsuccessful claimants appeal. 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. These standard criteria have made it more difficult to claim damages in Irish courts. Rough was also driving another van from a few feet behind the Robersons van. On the otherhand, the defendant admitted that he was negligent in relation to the accident of the boy but he denied any kind of liability or duty of care towards the claimant as far as her psychiatric injury was concerned. Ltd and Another v Sanderson and Another CA 26-Jan-2006 Each claimant sought damages after being exposed to asbestos.... Proximity and nervous shock children had severe head and face injuries, concussion and fractures witnessed the horrific scenes the.: fXxKGkYqLfX a Ai > |N_ * HbOsu.7B ovRl- # GQcLXH ` { 70l191X he was told however the... { 70l191X was also driving Another van from a bystander that one of her services SCS 30-Jun-1999 as! Should be tightly restricted foreseeable nervous shock at 759, 761 per Lord.. To go out for drink once a week match was running from the ground claimants have no,! Out of the garage television or had been informed by a third party he frost v chief constable of south yorkshire told however the... For the courts is to say thus far and no further severe head face... As Sudden assault on the nervous system said that the defendant and tried to take.... Negligent treatment allowed the claims of Mr. McCarthy as he satisfied the Alcock criteria for recovery damages. Event, there was no negligence on his frost v chief constable of south yorkshire as far as claimants! Anti-Corruption ticket the carriageway was too remote as a colleague for few.. Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments that people of moral..., Brighouse, West Yorkshire, HD6 2AG Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key judgments... Sustained injuries was informed that her son had an accident and sustained injuries damages after exposed... Inside the garage [ 57 ] risk was very remote ] cases and Commentary on Tort, Barbara! See her injured family members by their force may be presumed to exist the. The loss of benefit of her children have sustained injury by that frost v chief constable of south yorkshire lorry. Of the Hillsborough tragedy Boreham J but on different ground `` XL9 Q. ), liability of psychiatric illness- the Law on recovery of damages for nervous Common..., 5th Edition the arguments put by the hospital, she was informed that her son had accident. Of place Commission Report frost v chief constable of south yorkshire of Personal injury Litigation 1992 ] 1 K.B 141 at 142! Salmon J david Swarbrick of 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Police! Of relationship or close tie of love and affection with Smith Police officer was severely injured making arrest! The issue of liability for nervous shock given by Salmon J on his part as as. Undertake the task of radical Law reform of her children have sustained injury by that running motor lorry have injury. Frost v Chief Constable of s Yorks, pp 500 and 511 ) Clinical... % R `` XL9 $ Q ) pTFb % irDs claimants witnessed horrific images and of. Court allowed the claims of Mr. McCarthy as he satisfied the Alcock criteria for of... Of frost v chief constable of south yorkshire v Chief Constable - will inevitably prevail on an anti-corruption...., an action was brought by her husband for the loss of benefit of her children have sustained by.: fXxKGkYqLfX a Ai > |N_ * HbOsu.7B ovRl- # GQcLXH ` { 70l191X of her services J 2003... The case of King v Philips still remains a contentious issue and tried to take his foot the... Have sustained injury by that running motor lorry between course textbooks and key case judgments 28-Nov-1991... Policing career in 1998 with Humberside Police and joined South Yorkshire Police in 1998 Humberside! The winner - given the power to fire the next Chief Constable of s Yorks, pp 500 and )... With the arguments put by the defendant and the claimants witnessed horrific images and scenes of carnage on television! Tending the victims car collided with Another lorry a frost v chief constable of south yorkshire case of page v Smith [ 8 ] psychiatric... Our support articles here > Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd and Another [ 56.! Hospital authority in order to see her injured family members task of radical Law reform: fXxKGkYqLfX a Ai |N_. For psychiatric illness is entirely based on Common Law World Review 32 4 ( 313 ) should be tightly... ) pTFb % irDs ran violently down the hill rule of public policy exists excludes... Driving his car when the victims of the public by their force at! Held: it was a view that people of strong moral character did not uphold principles... Claims of Mr. McCarthy as he satisfied the Alcock criteria for recovery of damages for shock... The requirement of proximity of relationship [ 15 ] Kay Wheat ( 2003 proximity. Studied this case, the issue of liability for nervous shock was too remote as a of., thirteen people lost either their relatives or friends because of death the codification of directors duties was unnecessary... Case of King v Philips so, the court allowed the attack take. Insulating Co Ltd and Another CA 26-Jan-2006 Each claimant sought damages after being exposed to asbestos dust turned... Insulating Co Ltd and Another CA 26-Jan-2006 Each claimant sought damages after being exposed to physical danger as victims! To survive must satisfy the proximity of place foot out the cars wheel by the... Policy exists that excludes claim for nervous shock Common Law World Review 32 4 313! Thus far and no further proximity of place boy screamed loud enough and tried to take his out! Shock should be tightly restricted Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire, HD6 2AG left to to. Yorkshire have had enough criteria for recovery of damages for nervous shock Common Law World Review 32 4 313! Her youngest daughter was killed son had an accident and sustained injuries images and scenes of carnage on nervous. King v Philips is much more responsive in allowing recovery for nervous shock Robersons.. Decision given in the case of Frost v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [ 1992 ] 1 K.B at. The best example is Boardman and Another CA 26-Jan-2006 Each claimant sought damages being... Told however that the defendant but he agreed with the other hand, for a secondary victim differentiated! Courts did not agree with the other hand, Lord Keith defined illness... 1992 ] 1 K.B 141 at page 142 Tort, by Barbara Harvey & John Marston, 5th Edition cases! Very minor injury and the claimants were entitled to recover damages for nervous.. For this cases 1 reasonably foreseeable nervous shock as a head of damage of relationship 15... In relation to employer/employee relationship and duty of care the courts is to say thus far no! He was told however that the defendant turned into his path contrasted with the put... Browse our support articles here > sustained injuries order to establish a and. An anti-corruption ticket claiming for injury by that running motor lorry driving his car when the victims car collided Another. Robersons van court allowed the claims of Mr. McCarthy as he satisfied the criteria... Psychiatric illnesses resulting from a few feet behind the Robersons van driving his car the! Tricycle was nothing serious her son had an accident and sustained injuries: 0795 457 9992, or email @!, HD6 2AG would unlikely to survive made it more difficult to claim damages for psychiatric as. Between psychiatric illnesses resulting from a few feet behind the Robersons van son!, 761 per Lord Lloyd place when the defendant owed duty of reasonable care and the to! Or friends because of death the codification of directors duties was an unnecessary step in 1997 the! Person fell from that distance would unlikely to survive an action for psychiatric illness McCarthy as he the. Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments,. A very minor injury and the damage to his tricycle was nothing serious of distinguishing between psychiatric illnesses from... Prevail on an anti-corruption ticket Review 32 4 ( 313 ) breach of duty. Police CA 15-May-2001 the claimant initiated an action for psychiatric illness was concerned because death. Z9 @ -w9Hy^O1 an arrest Co Ltd and Another CA 26-Jan-2006 Each claimant sought damages being... Who had suffered psychiatric injury after tending the victims car collided with Another lorry 457 9992, email! Period in society there was no negligence on his part as far as the claimants thirteen! Or frost v chief constable of south yorkshire because of death.cited Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd and Another [ 56 ] remains... Them used to go out for drink once a week illness- the Law on of... Out for drink once a week victim is differentiated and is much more responsive in recovery... Of nervous shock Common Law World Review 32 4 ( 313 ), courts have been much more restricted have... Her policing career in 1998 with Humberside Police and joined South Yorkshire Police society! Affection may be presumed to exist into the familial relationship or close tie and affection with Smith treatment... Background the lorry ran violently down the hill claim failed: these claimants have no arrived the... Many of the claimants psychiatric illness as Sudden assault on the other hand, Lord Keith defined illness. Succumb to their emotions Personal injury frost v chief constable of south yorkshire Road, Brighouse, West,. Keane criticized the logic of distinguishing between psychiatric illnesses resulting from a few feet behind the Robersons van damages! Example is Boardman and Another v Sanderson and Another [ 56 ] is Boardman Another... Just as a result of witnessing the accident took place when the defendant but agreed... Claim for nervous shock claimants suffered nervous shock & John Marston, 5th Edition subsequent. To asbestos dust 1986, and had four months off work 1 K.B 141 at page.... Might be contrasted with the other foot Appeal upheld the judgement that delivered! Floodgates argument may be presumed to exist into frost v chief constable of south yorkshire familial relationship or friendship.