PSYCHIATRIC HARM

Question 1

Why is psychiatric harm a more modern concept than physical harm?

Answer 1

There is an increasingly wider recognition of mental illness

Question 2

Defining case of psychiatric harm

Answer 2

HEVICAN 1991

Question 3

Case facts HEVICAN 1991

Answer 3

• Must be a medically recognised mental illness

- Must go beyond ‘mere grief’

Question 4

2 different types of victim of psychiatric harm?

Answer 4

PRIMARY

SECONDARY

Question 5

Cases for primary victims?

Answer 5

PAGE v SMITH 1996 -> suffer after being physically injured/put in fear of physical injury
CHEMICAL AND INSULATING CO 2006 -> C must be directly involved in the accident and suffer legal harm, not just actual harm
WHITE -> to do with Hillsborough disaster, primary victims could be rescuers

Question 6

4 criteria for secondary victims

Answer 6

1. Must not be overly susceptible to psychiatric harm
2. Must have suffered harm through shock
3. Must have been in physical proximity to incident/aftermath
4. Must have had a close personal/family relationship with victim

Question 7

Cases for ‘overly susceptible to psychiatric harm’

Answer 7

BOURHILL v YOUNG 1943 -> pregnant woman miscarried after hearing an accident = not proximate enough and was overly susceptible to psyc harm
JAENSH 1984 -> Even if susceptible to such harm, if a normal person would’ve also suffered the same can still claim

Question 8

Case for suffering harm ‘through shock’

Answer 8

WALTERS 2002 -> coming across accident/aftermath must have caused them such disturbance that they suffered because of it

Question 9

Case for physical proximity

Answer 9

ALCOCK 1992 -> watching it on TV doesn’t give grounds must be ‘direct and immediate perception’

Question 10

Cases for close personal/family relationship

Answer 10

ALCOCK 1992 -> does include fiancées

WHITE 1999 -> only includes close family and not rescuers (they had to be primary victims)

Question 11

What is a relational duty?

Answer 11

Where a relationship automatically establishes a DofC in regards to psychiatric injury

Question 12

4 criteria for relational duty

Answer 12

1. Commercial relationship (ATTIA V BRIT GAS 1988)
2. Solicitor/client (AL-KANDARI 1980)
3. Schools/children (X v BEDFORDSHIRE CC 1995)
4. Doctor/ patient (ORGAN RETENTION GROUP 2004)

Question 13

Which isn’t employer/employee always a relational duty?

Answer 13

Is based on context of activity undertaken rather than relationship itself

Question 14

Case for employer/employee?

Answer 14

ALCOCK 1992
- Policeman couldn’t bring a case of relational duty against boss as it could be expected in their line of duty that job could include causes of psychiatric harm