TORTS B
- Created by: graceleah
- Created on: 08-09-18 00:58
View mindmap
- Pure Psychological Harm
- Step 1: What type of case is it?
- a) 'Near Miss' - P nearly involved in an accident (Page v Smith)
- b) 'Secondary Victim' - P witnesses injury to another (Annetts v Australian Stations)
- c) False accusations/ information (Tame v NSW)
- Step 2: Did P suffer a recognisable psychiatric illness? (Hinz v Berry)
- a) Sorrow does not sound in damages (MIM v Pusey)
- b) Intentional cause can sound (Giller v Procopets)
- Step 3: Was the harm to P reasonably foreseeable? (consider factors in Tame/Annetts)
- 1: Relationship of P to victim (Gifford v Strang)
- Close love and affection between P and victim
- Rescuers can claim (Chadwick v British Railways Board; Wicks v NSW)
- Coworkers can claim (Mount Isa Mines v Pusey)
- Property owners may be able to claim for property damage, but not certain in Australia (Attia v British Gas)
- 2: Propinquity (Tame/ Annetts; Philcox v King)
- Can witness aftermath (Jaensch v Coffey)
- Can hear about things rather if other factors are strong (Tame/ Annetts)
- 3: Sudden Shock (Tame/ Annetts)
- 4: Was the injury foreseeable to a person of normal fortitude? (Tame/ Annetts)
- Unless D aware of P's mental state
- 5: P-D relationship (Annetts v NSW; Gifford)
- 6: Relationship between D and victim? (Annetts v NSW; Gifford)
- 1: Relationship of P to victim (Gifford v Strang)
- Step 1: What type of case is it?
Comments
No comments have yet been made