psychiatric injury Flashcards
reilly v merseyside RHA
FACTS
a couple where trapped in a lift for one hour and twenty minutes. Claim failed as ‘physical symptoms of fear and panic such as sweating and breathing difficulties werent sufficent’
chadwick v british railways board
FACTS
c lived 200 yards from a train crash which had killed 90 people, he attended the scene to provide assistance . He worked through the night to aid victims and as a result of what he witnessed suffered acute anxiety neurosis receiving treatment as an impaitent for 6 months
page v smith
FACTS
c had suffered from ME over a period of time and was in recovery when he was involved in a minor car accident due to ds negligence, he wasnt physically injured but his ME was triggered and had become chronic and was unable to return to his job
page v smith
LEGAL PRINCIPLE
no need to establish psychatric injury as foreseeable, ordinary person wouldnt have suffered injury c suffered - this was relevant, thin skull rule
alcock v chief constable of south yorkshire
FACTS
c were all people who suffered psychological harm due to witnessing hilsborough disaster
alcock v chief constable of south yorkshire
LEGAL PRINCIPLE
each claim failed as no evidence of a close tie of love and affection, too much time passed before the saw ds body, didnt use unaided senses
McLoughlin v o’brien
FACTS
her husband and 3 children where in a car accident all seriously injured and one child died. her friend told her the news and when she went to the hospital she witnessed their injuries and suffered severe shock leading to depression
McLoughlin v O’brien
LEGAL PRINCIPLE
extended class of persons who would be considered proximate to who came within the immediate aftermath of the event
Paul, polmear and purchase
LEGAL PRINCIPLE
specifically in situations where a doctor has failed to diagnose an illness and cause injury to a paitent, a family member witnessing their deterioration is not able to claim as a secondary victim - particular to these specific circumstances
