Psychiatric harm

Question 1

1. Introduction

Answer 1

C may be able to claim against D in the tort of negligence for psychiatric harm.

Question 2

2. Reilly

Vernon

Answer 2

First, there must be a long-term recognised psychiatric condition (Reilly). Mere anxiety/grief is not sufficient and medical evidence will be required (Vernon).

Question 3

3. Page
   White
   McLoughlin

Answer 3

The next issue is whether C is a primary or secondary victim (Page) . Primary victims are those who are at risk of physical injury and fear for their own safety (White). Secondary victims are not at risk of physical injury and fear for someone else’s safety (McLoughlin).

Question 4

4. Test for primary victims

Answer 4

For primary victims, the usual test for duty of care under Caparo is used. Here, some harm was reasonably foreseeable to C as… (Kent). There is proximity in time, space and relationship as… (Bourhill). It is fair just and reasonable to impose a duty as… (Hill).

Question 5

5. Page

Answer 5

As a secondary victim C must show that psychiatric harm was reasonably foreseeable to a person of normal phlegm and fortitude as a result of D’s actions (Page).

Question 6

6. Close ties of love and affection

Answer 6

C must also satisfy the control mechanisms set out in Alcock. First, C must show that close ties of love and affection make psychiatric harm foreseeable. In Alcock it was confirmed that relationships such as parent/child and spouses would automatically qualify but all other relationships would have to be proved.

Question 7

7. Immediate aftermath

Answer 7

C must be present at the event or immediate aftermath. What constitutes the immediate aftermath depends on the facts of each case. Relevant factors include period of time that has elapsed, purpose of C’s visit and presentation of the victims (Alcock).

Question 8

8. Own unaided senses

Answer 8

C must witness the event or immediate aftermath using their own unaided senses, not on TV (Alcock) or over the phone (Boylan).

Question 9

9. Sion

Answer 9

C must also show that the psychiatric harm has been brought on by a sudden shock and not a growing realisation. In Sion, the development by a father of a stress related illnesses while watching his son over 14 days was held not to be sudden.

Question 10

10. Hill

Answer 10

If C can show foreseeability and proximity then it id likely to be fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty.