Psychiatric harm Flashcards
What is psychiatric harm
An other area of negligence where person can claim for nervous shock due to being part or witnessing an event which leads to mental harm
What are the changes that have happened over time and why were courts strict
lack of medical knowledge in the past resulted in courts not accepting many claim. This was also to avoid floodgates opening as courts did not want a rush of claims but wanted to serve justice
Why did claims in the past fail
- Lack of medical knowledge
- Courts feared people were faking symptoms since they were not visible
What happened in the case of “Victoria railway vs Coultas”
Claimant suffered nervous shock due to train crash but courts did not accept a claim to avoid opening floodgates to claim
What are 2 things which must be proven to impose liability
- Must be a recognised psychiatric disorder which courts are aware of
- Claimants psychiatric must fall into a certain category set by courts
For a claim to be successful what must it include
- Recognised mental condition due to shock of incident which is known to have long term effects “Reilly vs Merseyside”
- In the past it was not accepted however claims are now accepted where claimant suffers from grief and partly shock “Vernon vs Bosely”
What happened in the case of Reilly V Merseyside
No liability
Claimant trapped in elevator and suffered from claustrophobia and insomnia
What happened in the case of Vernon V Bosely
Claimant suffered shock of incident which led to grief after. In the past, cases of grief were not accepted as courts believed everyone suffers from grief one in a while
4 ways liability developed
- In the past only cases of real and serious fear for life were accepted “Delieu V White
- This extended to witnessing a traumatic event of family members which led to nervous shock “Hambrook V Stokes”
- This changed as claims for close but not related people were also accepted “Dooley V Cammell laird”
- Claims for shock due to damage to propertly are allowed “ Attia vs British Gas”
What are the restrictions to liability
- People who were not present at the incident “King V Phillips”
What is a primary victim
Someone who is directly linked with the incident as they were injured or feared for their own safety but also someone who witnessed a traumatic event “Page V Smith”
What is a secondary victim and what is the case to determine who is a secondary victim
Someone who did not suffer harm as they were not directly linked
“Alcock V chief constable of south yorkshire”
From this case it was decided that there were certain requirements to be a secondary victim.
1. Must prove close tie of love and affection
2. Must witness event
3. Was in proximity of the incident
What is rescuer and how is it determined they are a rescuer
Someone who suffers nervous as a result of helping primary victims. Problems over recent years is determining if they class as a primary victim however the case "Alcock" determined that if the requirements are satisfied a rescuer can claim as a secondary victim.
Who can’t claim
- Bystanders of the event “Bourhill V Young”
- Work mates as there is not a close enough tie of love and affection
- In the past the nervous shock had to be sudden however the CoA understand it may not be sudden
