C1 Willful Harm (Wilkinson v Downton)

Question 1

Definition

Answer 1

Where D, without justification, intentionally causes C physical harm or severe emotional distress which results in recognized psychiatric illness

Question 2

Wilkinson v Downton (1897)

Answer 2

• D told C as a joke that C’s husband had been injured
• C suffered nervous shock and resulting illness
• C could not sue for trespass since there was no physical contact
• D held liable on new basis  willful act that caused physical harm and infringed personal safety
• Intention to cause harm could be imputed to D because it was so likely that harm would be the result of what he did
• No justification despite lack of malicious purpose

Question 3

Wainwright v Home Office (2004)

Answer 3

• Mother and son got strip searched at prison visit
• Conducted in breach of Prison Rules
• Imputed intention not enough for a cause of action
• Could not recover for emotional distress unless it amounted to a recognized psychiatric illness
• Son sued successfully for battery since he was touched
• Breach of article 8 ECHR
• Tortious invasion of privacy today – successful claim

Question 4

OPO v Rhodes (2015)

Answer 4

• Mother sued unsuccessfully claiming publication of autobiography of estranged husband would emotionally harm their son
• Tort: intentionally causing physical or psychological harm or willfully infringing on the right to personal safety
• Required words or conduct directed towards C without justification or reasonable excuse
• Recklessness not enough – intention needed
• D did not intend to harm son
• D was justified in publishing the book
• Tort redefined: it is tortious where D, without justification, intentionally causes C physical harm or severe emotional distress which results in recognized psychiatric illness
• Aggravated damages possible