Tort Law - Psychiatric Injury Flashcards
White v Chief constable of South Yorkshire Police general
Hillsborough police officers
How do L&O suggest we should explain W v Essex CC so it fits under White?
Emphasis on C’s breach of duty instead
Name at least two cases showing application of unwitting agents of misfortune test
Dooley v Cammell; Hunter v British Coal; W v Essex County Council
What case seemed to suggest unwitting agents of misfortune are not primary victims?
Hunter v British Coal
What judge in McLoughlin gave a policy argument against recognising DoC in psychiatric injury widely, and what was it?
Wide definition of shock would need to be limited by proximity of relationship, perception and time and space, and possibility of ‘proliferation of claims’ if not narrowed
What did Lord Bridge say of the relationship requirement in McLoughlin by majority?
Imposes a ‘largely arbitrary limit of liability’
Hunter v British Coal general
Hydrant, only reacted to what he was told
Calvert v William Hill Credit recognised PI
Addiction
Young v Charles Church judgment
Court seemed to solely ask C to prove they were within the zone, irrespective of awareness, or injury as a result of his awareness
Melville v Home Office judgment
Extended occupational stress claims to shock, removing proximity of relationship requirement needed if claiming as a secondary victim
Re Creutzfeldt-Jakobs Disease Litigation general
Growth home, dwarves as children
Mitchell criticising PI
Builds on gender stereotype argument - Phillimore J in White ascertains ‘reasonable’ through gender stereotypes
What case drew a very fine line between it and Alcock?
Galli-Atkinson v Seghal
What judge said that the court in Page v Smith misunderstood the eggshell skull rule, departed from The Wagon Mound and on no previous authority?
Lord Goff in White v Chief Constable
Name two cases which seek to show application of a wider principle of assumption of responsibility?
Farrell v Merton; Sion v Hampstead Health Authority
McFarlane v Caledonia on definition
Court already dealt with definition of rescuers without much of an issue
What argument did the Law Commission find most persuasive for a restrictive approach?
floodates argument of a proliferation of claims from one event, or a mass from many events
Alcock on proximity of perception
Need to see event with your own unaided senses
Who thought it was better to explain employee/employer, prisoner/prison authority cases by ‘breach of relationship’?
Handford
Mullany on liability for communicating distressing news
If you can claim for economic loss caused by negligent misstatement, why not psychiatric injury?
Counselling services are not a panacea to relieve DoC always
Daw v Intel Corporation
Vernon v Bosley
Shock need not be the sole cause, just a cause of psychiatric injury
Was Lord Bridge in McLoughlin in the majority or the minority?
Minority
AB v Tameside, per Brooke LJ
NO AUTHORITY, but intimated any duty found to exist might not be a generalised feature of tort but specific on pre-existing patient/health authority relationship
What did Handford say of cases like employee/employer, prisoner/prison authority cases?
Better to explain them by ‘breach of relationship’ rather than primary/secondary framework - D owed obligation by virtue of a prior relationship
Why did G reject the Law Commission’s recommendations?
Statutory list could allow undesirable claims, reliance solely on relationship test would increase insurance premiums and shock helps with insurers’ evidentiary needs
Abduction, nightmares, psychiatric patient
Palmer v Tees Health Authority
What case found parents were primary victims due to a lack of a primary victim LEGALLY?
In re Organ Retention
Foreseeability generally insulates employer as many hide stress for fear of appearing unable to cope
Pratley v Surrey CC
McCarthy v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police
Proved close tie with deceased half-brother
In re Organ Retention Group Litigation general
Babies without insides
McLoughlin v O’Brian general
Road accident of husband and children
W v Essex County Council judgment
HoL declined strike out on the basis that the parents were only told
Mulheron on PI
Insistence on recognised PI is unjustified; should be a lower threshold of ‘grievous mental harm’
Bexson v Lee
100 yard to unconscious body of son allowed
Father two-week vigil
Sion v Hampstead Health Authority
White v CC of South Yorkshire Police judgment
HoL limited Alcock primary victim test to those within the foreseeable zone of danger, or who believed themselves o be within it
What in particular showed the HoL in White v CC were wary of developing primary victim too broadly?
Steyn’s heading ‘thus far and no further’ - leave it to the legislature
What do L&O find problematic about Bingham LJ’s judgment in Sion?
Shock should extend to primary victim
Why was the judgment in Greatorex v Greatorex uncommon?
Followed German law
What case supports Melville v Home Office?
Harman v South Essex Mental Health
Palmer v Tees Health Authority judgment
CoA struck out the claim as it was immaterial that the Mother’s nightmares and fears had been confirmed - did not mean she perceived the event
What did Lord Bridge say of foreseeability in McLoughlin?
Not a crushing burden as D is already guilty of harm
In what case did the court, in considering shock, look at how C subjectively perceived the event?
North Glamorgan NHS Trust v Walters
What judge described shock as a Sudden appreciation of a horrifying event by sight or sound which violently agitates the mind?
Lord Atner
Young v Charles Church general
Fatal electrocution of workmate
What did the Law Commission Report on Psychiatric Illness say of the distinction between primary and secondary victims?
More of a ‘hindrance than a help’
Grieves v FT Everard general
Asbestos pleural placques - No claim for injury in negligence, but developed a PI due to worry of cancer
What case suggests the court may not even require reasonable fear on the behalf of C at all - just whether they were within the zone?
Young v Charles Church
ME
Page v Smith
Greatorex v Greatorex judgment
No claim because would interfere with right to self-determination, and witnessing the suffering of others is part of family life
Page v Smith on foreseeability
Primary victim only needs to prove a TYPE of injury was reasonably foreseeable
Galli-Atkinson v Seghal judgment
Immediacy requirement extended to morgue visit - very fine line between this case and Alcock
What case declined to rule Page v Smith was wrongly decided?
Grieves v FT Everard
Butchart v Home Office judgment
Analogous relationship to employers and employees to find Doc
What judge and in what case called the relationship requirement a ‘largely arbitrary limit of liability’?
Lord Bridge in McLoughlin v O’Brian
what case showed shock need not be the sole cause, just a cause?
Vernon v Bosley
What case preferred the Page test as being ‘much simpler’?
Corr v IBC
Hegarty v EE Caledonia
Per Brooke LJ, reasonable fear is only ‘one part of the test’
Hambrook v Stokes Bros general
Runaway driverless lorry
Melville v Home Office general
Health care officer, 8 suicides
Barber v Somerset CC
No breach of DoC by requiring employee to carry out contractually agreed amount of work
What judge and in what case highlighted that reasonable fear is only ‘one part of the test’ for DoC in PI?
Brooke LJ in Hegarty v EE Caledonia
What does the case of Grieves v FT Everard not rule out?’
‘Fear of the future’ cases
What case showed that reasonable fear by C alone is insufficient?
McFarlane v EE Caledonia
W v Essex County Council general
Abusive foster child
What did Todd say of psychiatric injury area of law?
‘Dreadful mess’
What were the two underlying issues in the early 20th century leading to scepticism of psychiatric injury claims?
Not clear if it had an underlying physical cause, and seen as a woman’s illness
What does Handford argue about the tests for psychiatric and physical injury?
Should be equated - no to floodgate argument as RF is still a ‘considerable hurdle to surmount’
Hatton v Sutherland general
Test case for legal duty and reasonable foreseeability in employers
What did the court find immaterial in Melville v Home Office?
That it was a case involving day-to-day work rather than one event
When was the impact of Donoghue felt in the area of psychiatric injury, and in what case?
1983 in McLoughlin v O’Brian
W v Essex County Council judgment
No proximity, so not secondary, but parents could claim as primary victims