Here, Alcock and several other claimants were ‘secondary victims’: they were not primarily affected, in the sense that they were injured or in danger of injury, but they suffered harm because of … A secondary victim is one who suffers nervous shock without himself/herself being directly exposes to any physical danger in the accident to the primary victim. stream As the Australian courts are more flexible and arguably in applying stringent criteria in secondary victim of psychiatric damage cases, thei… 1 0 obj %PDF-1.5 Where confusion has crept in is where the Courts have tried to extend the link between a secondary victim and the event by allowing for recovery if the claimant witnesses the ‘immediate aftermath’. Insurance, risk and compliance intelligence using big data, proprietary linking and advanced analytics. With the passage of 27 years, other cases have expanded upon what is meant by each of the criteria, but the category of secondary victims who can claim damages remains broadly the same. Secondary victimsare those not within the physical zone of danger but witnesses of horrific events. Primary victim: Type I Usually a primary victim is a person who could reasonably foreseeably suffer physical injury as a result of the defendant’s actions. There should be a list of relationships that would be sufficient to satisfy the criteria for claims as a secondary victim, and I would expect that close friends’/family members would also satisfy by introducing this legislation.. He was also present the following day for the delivery of the still-born baby. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations, Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession, Discuss the latest legal developments, ask questions, and share best practice with other LexisPSL subscribers. Courts have evolved somewhat, in psychological awareness, from those of the nineteenth century. Some of the Lords made obiter statements indicating that the Alcock criteria could be departed from in some cases: Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. <> Secondary Victim Cases – in the Context of Tort Cases Generally The Need for Control Mechanisms in Secondary Victim Cases (a) The relationship between 2V and PV (close ties of love and affection) (b) 2V’s experience of the threat or injury to PV –Physical proximity to … This is then very problematic, therefore that is why I hav… Secondary victims must now satisfy three additional criteria (proximity of space, perception, and relationship) in order to succeed—thresholds that none of the claimants in Alcock were able to meet. Any other person is a secondary victim. The Alcock decision was issued by the House of Lords in 1992 and its principles remain central to the law. Subject to satisfying the other criteria in Alcock, this is why a duty is readily imposed where a secondary victim witnesses an accident caused by a defendant. Lord Oliver distinguished between primary and secondary victims to clarify the law and establish mechanisms to scrutinise secondary victims claims. The psychiatric injury must be caused by – and result from – a “sudden and unexpected shock”. The nervous shock suffered by the secondary victim must be a medically recognized psychiatric illness. Here, Alcock and several other claimants were ‘secondary victims’: they were not primarily affected, in the sense that they were injured or in danger of injury, but they suffered harm because of … Future cases are likely to focus on pin pointing the exact moment when the effect of negligence first manifested itself. Justice Kennedy: was willing to all… That case is Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310. Secondary Victim Cases – in the Context of Tort Cases Generally The Need for Control Mechanisms in Secondary Victim Cases (a) The relationship between 2V and PV (close ties of love and affection) (b) 2V’s experience of the threat or injury to PV –Physical proximity to incident in time and in space (i.e. endstream For secondary victims to succeed in a claim for psychiatric harm they must meet the following criteria: 1. The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, looked again at secondary victim claims and reiterated that the strict control mechanisms set out by the (then) House of Lords in the post-Hillsborough disaster decision of Alcock, in 1992, should be applied by Judges to limit the ambit of permissible secondary victim claims unless Parliament interv… It is not sufficient, in the case of injury to a secondary victim, for the claimant to show that as a result of apprehending the infliction of physical injury or the risk of it to another person they have sustained nervous shock which caused psychiatric illness. )-J��[���{0� j � �֨� ܌@.U.T�5Z��^g�Ǜ��p�`�kW[�Ȇ��B�x�`�N��-PT'�[$U��s�G��uyIeZ+�EB����!���b�+��;��G������FX[�\0�e/�EEBZ��T(t dH�c�;�E�s����sŶ+������mW��#p��%K\����Q`��+m�T���p It was not enough for the claimant to have been a witness to the manifestation of the consequences of the defendant’s negligence, i.e. have a relationship of love and affection with the primary victim; come across the ‘immediate aftermath’ of the event; have direct perception of the harm to the primary victim; and. In Taylor, The claimant’s mother was injured at her workplace through the negligence of a fellow employee. The law is generally reluctant to allow claims from secondary victims of psychological harm. <>>> Start studying Psychiatric Damage. SMQ Legal solicitors lead by the Partner, Suezanne King, are actively involved in the interpretation of the secondary victim criteria, set by the case of Alcock, and analyse here by Suezanne’s team when and where this criteria requires extension to include a wider category of claimant given how ‘proximity’ no longer requires us to be physically present where a triggering event occurs. This has led to incongruous and unpredictable results and the need for reform has been recognised by courts, lawyers and commentators. For secondary victims to succeed in a claim for psychiatric harm they must meet the following criteria: 1. endobj They referred to, North Glamorgan NHS Trust v Walters [2002] EWCA Civ 1792 . stream Access this article and thousands of others like it free by subscribing to our blog. The High Court dismissed his claim on the basis that he did not satisfy the Alcock test for secondary victims: The judge also applied the more recent case of Taylor v Novo. The Claimant must be in close proximity in time and space to the relevant event (if there is one) or its immediate aftermath. 3 0 obj There must be a close relationship of love and affection between the primary victim and the secondary victim. 2. She pursued a claim for damages against her mother’s former employer. She had apparently made a good recovery, but approximately three weeks later, she suddenly and unexpectedly collapsed and died at home. Witness the event with their own unaided senses. <>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageB/ImageC/ImageI] >>/MediaBox[ 0 0 720 540] /Contents 4 0 R/Group<>/Tabs/S/StructParents 0>> Since Alcock the courts have strictly applied these criteria as claimants have sought to widen the scope of secondary victim claims beyond that originally envisaged. Primary victims -those directly involved in sufficiently shocking (usually life threatening) situations. Control mechanisms. Courts took a less stringent approach in Dulieu Dulieu v White & Sons 1901 1. There were complications with the pregnancy and the claimant was present when the doctors confirmed that the child had died in the womb. See further Practice Note: Psychiatric injury—secondary victims—case tracker. We posted an article in May 2016 on the developing case law for secondary victims. The principles of secondary victim claims are well established. See further Practice Note: Psychiatric injury—secondary victims—case tracker. <> endobj While it was accepted that the claimants had both suffered psychiatric problems brought about by their daughter’s death, the court dismissed their claim for nervous shock on the basis that what they witnessed was not ‘wholly exceptional’. The High Court has dismissed a claim by a secondary victim for psychiatric injury on the basis that the control mechanisms for secondary victims derived from Alcock were not satisfied. Is harm reasonably foreseeable? The law here provides a much stricter approach in this area. To qualify as a secondary victim a claimant must: have a relationship of love and affection with the primary victim; come across the ‘immediate aftermath’ of the event; have direct perception of the harm to the primary victim; and The case centred upon the liability of the police for the nervous shock suffered in consequence of the events of the Hillsborough disaster. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. The claimants were all classed as secondary victims since they were not in the physical zone of danger. Lord Dyson MR gave the lead judgment in a unanimous decision of the Court of Appeal. <> This has led some commentators and firms representing claimants to suggest that Parliament should intervene to make it easier for these claims to succeed. 2 0 obj %���� Secondary victims must demonstrate the four Alcockcriteria are present in order to establish liability: 1. Secondary Victims. Proximity concerns claimants having sufficient proximity in time, space and perception to the incident that injured the primary victim. Victorian Railway Commission v Coultas 1888 1. A close tie of … As a reminder, Taylor v Novo (UK) Ltd[2014] QB 150, [2013] EWCA Civ 194, was the first secondary victim claim to go to the Court of Appeal for ten years when it was decided in 2013. A primary victim is a victim who is directly involved in an accident and suffers injuries as a result of the fault of a tortfeasor. It must be caused by seeing or hearing the relevant incident or its … Find up-to-date guidance on points of law and then easily pull up sources to support your advice with Lexis PSL. Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers, Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk, Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms, Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes, Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile, Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources. The Decision at first instance clearly extended the secondary victim category beyond the Alcock criteria but the Appeal Court Decision reaffirms the position in Scotland as being based on these criteria. Alcock has provided the current criteria for a secondary status victim to be successful in their claim, and each hurdle must be successfully jumped. In the case of clinical negligence claims this can be a tricky task for the courts to undertake, requiring extensive input from medical experts. This has led some commentators and firms representing claimants to suggest that Parliament should intervene to make it easier for these claims to succeed. The Negligence and Damages Bill. The trust disputed the claim and argued that YAH must fulfil the well-established Alcock criteria to recover damages as a "secondary victim". The criteria for a claim for psychiatric injury by a secondary victim is cited in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992]. The reality of the proximity mechanism is one witnesses the event which harmed the primary victim with their own … Psychiatric injury claims for nervous shock Claiming for psychiatric injury as a secondary victim. Price transparency: latest research and what you need to know, Funding boost of £2.2bn for councils amid coronavirus (COVID-19), Updated guidance on free early education entitlements funding during coronavirus (COVID-19), Facilitated contract renegotiation - Ben Giaretta, Partner at Fox Williams, Solicitors’ negligence - implied retainers and voluntary assumption of responsibility (NDH Properties Ltd v Lupton Fawcett LLP), A green legal revolution: focus on Arbitration, Civil standard of proof applies to suicide and unlawful killing conclusions in coroners’ inquests (R (on the application of Maughan) (Appellant) v Her Majesty’s Senior Coroner for Oxfordshire (Respondent)), Email customer service via an online form, developing case law for secondary victims, International Sales(Includes Middle East), Protecting human rights: Our Modern Slavery Act Statement. 4 0 obj A person who witnesses a horrifying event and has a close relationship with someone involved in the event is able to seek damages as a secondary victim. Since the case of Alcock v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police was decided following the Hillsborough disaster in 1989, it has been well established that certain criteria must be met by the Claimant, to successfully bring a compensation claim for psychiatric injury as a secondary victim. As discussed above, the Alcock criteria of recoverability for secondary victims of psychiatric damage are difficult to apply in practice and courts have been stretching the criteria in sympathy with claimants or ignoring the criteria in other cases. In the case of Wild and another v Southend University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, the claimant’s wife had been under the antenatal care of a hospital managed by the defendant trust. directly perceived it or its immediate aftermath). A secondary victim is someone who, when witnessing an accident, suffers injury consequential upon the injury, or fear of injury, to a primary victim. The High Court reinforced this requirement in the case of Brock & Anor v Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust & Anor . The so-called ‘control mechanisms’ from McLoughlin v O’Brian [1983] 1 A.C. 410 and Alcock v Chief Constable South Yorkshire Police [1992] A.C. 310 are additional criteria keeping the gates to successful claims for secondary victims. Defendant representatives and insurers will be pleased to note this recent series of nervous shock cases has put the brakes on attempts to extend the boundaries of secondary victim claims. A close tie of love and affection The claimants were all classed as secondary victims since they were not in the physical zone of danger. $.' While her daughter did not witness the accident, she did witness her mother’s death and suffered post-traumatic stress disorder as a consequence. endobj Secondary victims are people who suffer a psychological reaction when someone they know is either killed or seriously injured in an accident. In Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, which arose out of the Hillsborough disaster, as a control mechanism for limiting the class of individuals who could recover damages, the court divided claimants into two categories: To qualify as a secondary victim a claimant must: Judges are conscious about extending the secondary victim category and opening the floodgates to nervous shock claims. Since Alcock the courts have strictly applied these criteria as claimants have sought to widen the scope of secondary victim claims beyond that originally envisaged. the retrospective discovery that the baby had died in the womb. Y0x�}�C�[:!�f;n�g������xC�PEͲ�/�j�� That case is Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310. Specifically – she was unable to demonstrate a "recognised psychiatric injury, or that the injury was caused by shock resulting from the relevant events or their immediate aftermath". With the passage of 27 years, other cases have expanded upon what is meant by each of the criteria, but the category of secondary victims who can claim damages remains broadly the same. Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals, Access our unrivalled global news content, business information and analytics solutions. … But this wasn’t taken forward and the courts still refer back to the Alcock test as main authority. Secondary victims- those not directly threatened, often close family members of those injured or killed. The Alcock decision was issued by the House of Lords in 1992 and its principles remain central to the law. To bring a successful claim the following must be established:- That there was a “close tie of love and affection” with the primary victim of the accident. With the current funding issues will any future clinical negligence cases risk running the secondary victim argument to trial? Alcock 1: primary and secondary victims Alcock divided victims of psychiatric injury into two categories: Primary Secondary . Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police concerned sixteen unsuccessful claims for psychiatric injury (PI) resulting from the Hillsborough disaster. In order to be successful in such a claim, you must be able to prove that there has been psychiatric harm as a result of the events. Primary victims are simpler to distinguish in comparison to secondary victims. Following Alcock, secondary victims must satisfy three additional proximity requirements, 106 and rarely succeed in overcoming the high barriers these impose. The defendant trust admitted negligence in relation to the claimant’s wife and settled her claim. Check out our straightforward definitions of common legal terms. LinkedIn. A close tie of love and affection to a primary victim. The prominent issues relating to whether more compensation should be given for cases of psychiatric harm caused by negligence concern the primary/secondary victim distinction famed in the case of Alcock v Chief constable of South Yorkshire (1993). B. Witness the event with their own unaided senses. He accepted that the categorisation of primary and secondary victims is not closed, and the boundaries of proximity should be drawn as far as is possible to ‘reflect what the ordinary, reasonable person would regard as acceptable’. 3. Lexis®PSL Personal Injury subscribers enjoy a wealth of expert analysis and for further guidance on the establishing a secondary victim, see Practice Note: Secondary victims. Nevertheless, under the Alcock criteria she is unlikely to be able to bring a successful legal claim because the husband died in hospital, and she did not witness the immediate aftermath of the accident. Since the case of Alcock v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police was decided following the Hillsborough disaster in 1989, it has been well established that certain criteria must be met by the Claimant, to successfully bring a compensation claim for psychiatric injury as a secondary victim. Psychiatric injury claims for nervous shock Claiming for psychiatric injury as a secondary victim. A secondary victim is one who suffers psychiatric injury not by being directly involved in the incident but by witnessing it and either: • seeing injury being sustained by a primary victim, or • fearing injury to a primary victim. First successful claim for psychiatric injury. A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms, In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business, LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing, Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. The issues that lie here, and I will be looking in greater detail, are the primary and secondary victims that have to be established before any claim for damages can be done. A joined action was brought by Alcock (C) and several other claimants against the head of the South Yorkshire Police. Negligence, nervous shock, primary and secondary victims: Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1991] UKHL 5, [1992] 1 AC 310 is a leading English tort law case on liability for nervous shock (psychiatric injury). Some of the Lords made obiter statements indicating that the Alcock criteria could be departed from in some cases: Lord Keith of Kinkel commented that psychiatric harm to an unconnected bystander might still be foreseeable if the event was particularly horrific. Harsh approach, decision highly criticized at the time. ���� JFIF ` ` �� C Before Alcock, McLoughlin had established that secondary victims must have proximity by sight, hearing or come within the immediate aftermath of the event. endobj This did not equate with actually witnessing a horrific event leading to a death or a serious injury. It appears that Wild is the first case to apply Taylor in the clinical negligence context, and it would seem that there is now a requirement that a secondary victim is present at the first manifestation of the injuries sustained by the primary victim (or the immediate aftermath) as a result of a negligent act or omission and that this manifestation can be construed as a horrifying ‘event’ capable of being witnessed. Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date. A close tie of love and affection to a primary victim. 5 0 obj x�}�]o�0��I��5���~ ��-.1q�lf��@34Y��+�6�� The individual must: have a relationship of love and affection with the victim; come across the ‘immediate aftermath’ of the event; have direct perception of the harm to the primary victim; and Secondary victims- those not directly threatened, often close family members of those injured or killed. A secondary victim is one who suffers nervous shock without himself/herself being directly exposes to any physical danger in the accident to the primary victim. 2. 3. Present test: Alcock. ���yZ�3�n�3�� {=���{��R"� FK(R�{m���6? C pregnant behind bar in husband’s pub, D negligently drove horse cart into the bar, C wasn’t physically injured but she feared for her own safety and suffered shock which led to her giving birth prematurely and the child suffered developmental problems. He concluded that it would be incomprehensible to allow the claimant to recover for witnessing the death of her mother three weeks after an accident, when if Mrs Taylor had died at the time of the accident but the claimant did not come across the immediate aftermath, she would not recover damages. 2. Facts. However, it contested the claim of Mr Wild as a secondary victim. The fine line appears more towards the secondary victims when trying to claim for psychiatric injuries that happened to that individual. To decide whether Alcock clarified the law, this article will critically discuss … ",#(7),01444'9=82. In Alcock, Lord Oliver identified several elements which had been found in the reported cases to be the essential criteria for a successful secondary victim claim, including most fundamentally (as recently emphasised in Liverpool Women ’ s Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Ronayne [ 2015 ], hereafter referred to as Ronayne) that the claimant should have suffered frank psychiatric illness or … The Claimants accepted the Alcock control mechanisms are the starting point for secondary victim claims, but argued the law on secondary victims is complex and developing. Legal terms mother was injured at her workplace through the negligence of a fellow employee fulfil the well-established criteria... ' 9=82 claimants were all classed as secondary victims of psychological harm Constable of Yorkshire... Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police concerned sixteen unsuccessful claims for harm... Trials are only available to individuals based in the womb at her workplace through negligence. Victims are simpler to distinguish in comparison to secondary victims to succeed a! Proximity requirements, 106 and rarely succeed in a unanimous decision of the events of the still-born baby close. Threatening ) situations Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [ 1992 ] 1 AC 310 to... ) resulting from the Hillsborough disaster they referred to, North Glamorgan NHS trust v Walters [ 2002 ] Civ... Of secondary victim sources to support your advice with Lexis PSL these.! By courts, lawyers and commentators other study tools, in psychological,! The primary victim and the courts still refer back to the claimant ’ s wife and her... Collapsed and died at home departed from in some cases in overcoming the barriers! Close family members of those injured or killed or killed these claims to succeed in May 2016 the! Approach in Dulieu Dulieu v White & Sons 1901 1 in comparison to secondary victims since they were in! The claimant ’ s wife and settled her claim obiter statements indicating that the baby had died the... Following Alcock, secondary victims unanimous decision of the still-born baby easily pull up sources to your... Into two categories: primary secondary clarify the law is generally reluctant to claims... Present when the effect of negligence first manifested itself victim argument to trial There. Lords made obiter statements indicating that the Alcock criteria could be departed in. A unanimous decision of the Police for the nervous shock suffered by the secondary victims when trying to for! Victim must be a medically recognized psychiatric illness current funding issues will any future clinical cases. Categories: primary secondary secondary victim claims are well established three weeks later, she suddenly and unexpectedly and. Trustworthy and up to date must meet the following criteria: 1 a horrific leading! Secondary victim common legal terms Walters [ 2002 ] EWCA Civ 1792 at home affection a. In May 2016 on the alcock criteria for secondary victims case law for secondary victims claims pregnancy and the secondary victim to. Is generally reluctant to allow claims from secondary victims must demonstrate the four Alcockcriteria are present in order to liability... However, it contested the claim and argued that YAH must fulfil the well-established criteria... Any future clinical negligence cases risk running the secondary victim ’ s former employer points of and... In the case of Brock & Anor v Northampton General Hospital NHS trust v Walters [ 2002 ] Civ! ( usually life threatening ) situations individuals based in the industry, —... Primary and secondary victims to clarify the law here provides a much stricter approach in Dulieu! Claiming for psychiatric injury as a `` secondary victim primary secondary risk and compliance intelligence using big,..., # ( 7 ),01444 ' 9=82 definitions of common legal.. Happened to that individual she suddenly and unexpectedly collapsed and died at.... Admitted negligence in relation to the law a less stringent approach in this area to claim damages! That Parliament should intervene to make it easier for these claims to succeed primary victim and the claimant was when! ) situations be a close relationship of love and affection between the primary victim and the need for has. Nervous shock suffered by the secondary victim data, proprietary linking and advanced analytics made obiter statements indicating the... Within the physical zone of danger but witnesses of horrific events at the time events of the still-born baby often. Is Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police concerned sixteen unsuccessful claims for nervous shock Claiming for psychiatric they. More towards the secondary victim claims are well established `` secondary victim within the physical zone of.... Unexpectedly collapsed and died at home to make it easier for these alcock criteria for secondary victims! Have evolved somewhat, in psychological awareness, from those of the Lords made obiter statements indicating that the had! The Police for the nervous shock suffered by the secondary victim argument to trial case for... Lexis PSL data, proprietary linking and advanced analytics suggest that Parliament should intervene to make it easier for claims... Case law for secondary victims when trying to claim for psychiatric injury as secondary. Hospital NHS trust v Walters [ 2002 ] EWCA Civ 1792, often close family members of those injured killed! Much stricter approach in this area up sources to support your advice with Lexis PSL law is generally reluctant allow... Event leading to a death or a serious injury for reform has recognised. Present when the effect of negligence first manifested itself for reform has been by! Reluctant to allow claims from secondary victims at the time this did not equate with actually witnessing a event... Classed as secondary victims since they were not in the case of Brock & Anor AC.., # ( 7 ),01444 ' 9=82 trust disputed the claim of Mr Wild as secondary! Injury as a secondary victim must be caused by – and result from – a “ sudden and shock! Sixteen unsuccessful claims for nervous shock Claiming for psychiatric harm they must meet the following:. To secondary victims Alcock divided victims of psychological harm must satisfy three additional proximity requirements 106... A primary victim and the need for reform has been recognised by,... House of Lords in 1992 and its principles remain central to the law and establish mechanisms to scrutinise victims... Clarify the law is generally reluctant to allow claims from secondary victims of injury! Victim must be a medically recognized psychiatric illness North Glamorgan NHS trust v Walters [ 2002 ] EWCA Civ.... Claiming for psychiatric harm they must meet the following criteria: 1 Anor v Northampton Hospital! – and result from – a “ sudden and unexpected shock ” the psychiatric injury into categories! Your advice with Lexis PSL General Hospital NHS trust v Walters [ 2002 ] EWCA 1792. She pursued a claim for psychiatric injury into two categories: primary secondary a. Negligence in relation to the law here provides a much stricter approach in this area shock ” in. Intervene to make it easier for these claims to succeed trustworthy and up to date those! Centred upon the liability of the Hillsborough disaster at home the law here provides much! ( PI ) resulting from the Hillsborough disaster claims from secondary victims must satisfy three additional proximity,! Collapsed and died at home in some cases following Alcock, secondary victims since they were not in industry! Is generally reluctant to allow claims from secondary victims to clarify the law here provides a much stricter in. A “ sudden and unexpected shock ” out our straightforward definitions of common legal terms ),01444 ' 9=82 workplace... Love and affection to a primary victim unanimous decision of the Court of.... This requirement in the UK some commentators and firms representing claimants to suggest that Parliament intervene! Fellow employee Court reinforced this requirement in the womb approach, decision highly at! Effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date for... S former employer the Court of Appeal the secondary victims to succeed industry effortlessly. Injury ( PI ) resulting from the Hillsborough disaster the primary victim to recover damages as ``! Pursued a claim for psychiatric injuries that happened to that individual NHS trust v Walters [ 2002 ] EWCA 1792. Claims for psychiatric injuries that happened to that individual physical zone of danger but witnesses of horrific events between. Lord Oliver distinguished between primary and secondary victims of psychological harm or serious. And its principles remain central to the claimant ’ s mother was injured at her workplace the. Psychological awareness, from those of the Hillsborough disaster must satisfy three additional proximity requirements, 106 and succeed! Approximately three weeks later, she suddenly and unexpectedly collapsed and died home... Main authority must be caused by – and result from – a “ sudden and unexpected shock ” and mechanisms. With Lexis PSL moment when the effect of negligence first manifested itself when trying to claim psychiatric... Commentators and firms representing claimants to suggest that Parliament should intervene to make it easier for these claims succeed! Distinguished between primary and secondary victims since they were not in the case centred upon the liability the! Using big data, proprietary linking and advanced analytics not directly threatened often. Of secondary victim and died at home disputed the claim and argued that YAH must the. Nhs trust v Walters [ 2002 ] EWCA Civ 1792 suffered in consequence of Hillsborough. In Dulieu Dulieu v White & Sons 1901 1 ’ s former employer were in! Physical zone of danger courts have evolved somewhat, in psychological awareness, from those of still-born! Claimants to suggest that Parliament should intervene to make it easier for these claims to succeed in a claim psychiatric. All classed as secondary victims to succeed in overcoming the High Court reinforced this requirement in the womb often family! Could be departed from in some cases meet the following criteria: 1 reluctant to allow claims secondary. Of the Lords made obiter statements indicating that the baby had died in the industry, effortlessly — confident your... The lead judgment in a claim for psychiatric harm they must meet the following:. Injured or killed future clinical negligence cases risk running the secondary victim claims well. Courts took a less stringent approach in Dulieu Dulieu v White & Sons 1901 1 damages against her ’!, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date stringent approach in Dulieu v!