Psychiatric Injury

?
  • Created by: Lara
  • Created on: 24-03-19 14:22
Victorian Railway Commissioners v Coultras 1898
Psychiatric Injury not recognised
1 of 17
Dulieu v White & Sons 1901
First claim of psychiatric Injury but due to miscarriage. Must be in 'danger zone' or have 'cause to fear injury to themselves'
2 of 17
Hambrook v Stokes 1925
Mother claimed as the first secondary victim. Must precieved the event with one's own unaided senses.
3 of 17
Bourhill v Young 1943
Still birth due to shock, foreseeability test used for both primary and secondary victims
4 of 17
McCloughlin v O'Brian 1983
Saw dead son and injured family in hospital but in the same state. Control test for secondary victims until reformulated in Alcock. Witnesses of the 'horrifying event' or 'immediate aftermath'
5 of 17
White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police 1999
Lord Steyn reinterpreted Page v Smith and said psychiatric harm is to be treated differently to physical harm. Rescuers must show they were within the range of foreseeable injury'.
6 of 17
Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police 1992
Lord Bingham said psychiatric injury includes 'all relevant forms of mental illness, neurosis and personality change'. Strict approach taken to secondary victims; C must prove close ties of love and affection
7 of 17
Vernon v Boseley 1997
Pathological grief disorder is a psychiatric injury
8 of 17
Page v Smith 1996
Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) is a psychiatric injury. Foreseeability of psychiatric harm seen as the same as physical harm.
9 of 17
Farrel v Avon HA 2001
Father held a dead baby thinking it was his. Page approach taken to allow father to be a primary victim since the law was otherwise too restrictive
10 of 17
Dooley v Cammel Laird 1951
Unwitting agents believe they may have caused harm or death to another, even if they have not
11 of 17
Hunter v British Coal 1998
C must be directly involved to be an unwitting agent
12 of 17
Chadwick v British Transport Commissioners 1967
Rescuers previously considered primary victims
13 of 17
Galli-Atkinson v Seghal 2003
saw dead body in mortuary and held psychiatric injury, however, same scenario but not held in the case of Alock
14 of 17
Sion v Hampstead HA 1994
Shock must be sudden, does not include someone dying in hospital over 3 weeks
15 of 17
North Glamorgan NHS Trust v Walters 2002
Shock can last up to 36 hours
16 of 17
Liverpool Womens Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Ronayne 2015
Restrictive approach taken to clinical negligence cases recently due to policy reasons
17 of 17

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

First claim of psychiatric Injury but due to miscarriage. Must be in 'danger zone' or have 'cause to fear injury to themselves'

Back

Dulieu v White & Sons 1901

Card 3

Front

Mother claimed as the first secondary victim. Must precieved the event with one's own unaided senses.

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

Still birth due to shock, foreseeability test used for both primary and secondary victims

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

Saw dead son and injured family in hospital but in the same state. Control test for secondary victims until reformulated in Alcock. Witnesses of the 'horrifying event' or 'immediate aftermath'

Back

Preview of the back of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Tort resources »