Negligence: Psychiatric Injury

Question 1

Describe some of the development involved for ‘nervous shock’ and psychiatric injury?

Answer 1

• Victorian Railway case: claimant was almost hit by a train but felt shock (where term ‘nervous shock’ stems from)
• Richard Couch: condition wasn’t well understood at the time + issues of proof
• Railway spine theory: Giving shock or jolt to nervous system will stop working correctly (not scientific but trying to find rationale)

Question 2

Describe the effect of the Staplehurst Railway disaster for Charles Dickens.

Answer 2

• 9 June 1865: Charles Dickens involved in major rail disaster and developed symptoms of ptsd
• Accounts from family and memoirs: prone to fits and sudden rushes of terror for no accountable reason

Question 3

Define primary victim and secondary victim.

Answer 3

• Primary: direct participants in accident in danger of physical harm
• Secondary: not in harms way bit psychologically affected by witnessing harm to another

Question 4

Describe what happened in the case of Medway NHS Foundation Trust [2018].

Answer 4

• Claimant in hospital and C-section negligently done, injuring child in process (is mother secondary victim?)
• Held: if injury happens before child capable surviving of own right, mother is primary victim (“fully functioning human being”)

Question 5

What requirements are needed for primary victims?

Answer 5

• Individual must have been in physical danger or reasonable fear of physical harm
• Claimant must suffer from recognised clinical condition (e.g., PTSD)
• No need to establish physical injury

Question 6

Describe what happened in the case of McFarlane v EE Caledonia [1994].

Answer 6

• Must be reasonable apprehension of impending harm
• Facts: claimant on supply vessel shocked when rig exploded
• Evidence: at no point did the vessel go close enough to zone of danger
• Courts: did not say apprehension was reasonable, he wasn’t traumatised at time and subsequent media triggered his illness

Question 7

What are the basic requirements for secondary victims?

Answer 7

• Requirement for a personal connection with the primary victim {Hambrook case and Bourhill}
• Being in sight and/or sound of events {Young v Downey}

Question 8

{Hillsborough Disaster case} State the key issues in the case of Alcock v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police [1991].

Answer 8

• Claims brought by relatives in other parts of stadium or watching at home
• “Close tie of love and addection” with primary victim? (effectively rules out bystanders)
• Were events viewed with unaided senses? (problem with TV coverage)
• Were events “sudden and shocking”?
• Did mental health exceed normal “grief and sorrow”?

Question 9

State what happened in the case of Chadwick v BR Board [1967].

Answer 9

• Arose from Lewisham railway disaster in 1957 which 90 people died
• Claim brought by local resident who heard the crash and came out to see if he could help.
• Climbed into wrecked carriages and administered first aid.
• Went on to develop ‘psycho neurosis’ (probably PTSD according to modern terminology)

Question 10

{Hillsborough Disaster case} Rescuers are not owed a duty of care in White v Chief Constable of S Yorks Police. Describe what happened in this following case.

Answer 10

• Psychiatric injury claims brought by police officers on duty in the Hillsborough stadium but who were not in direct danger.
• Could they nevertheless claim as rescuers on the basis of Chadwick?
• The House of Lords held that rescuers do not constitute a special category and must claim as primary or secondary victims.
• But note the dissenting judgment of Lord Goff who felt that Chadwick had been reinterpreted so as to fit the primary/secondary victim classification.