Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
TORT- PSYCHIATRIC INJURY (Medically recognised psychiatric injury? (:red…
TORT- PSYCHIATRIC INJURY
Medically recognised psychiatric injury?
:red_cross:
Not a DOC
Hinz v Berry
White v CC of South Yorkshire
Lord Steyn:
"The law cannot compensate for all emotional suffering even if it is acute and truly debilitating."
Compensation for psychiatric injury would impede recovery.
:check:
Caused by physical injury?
:check:
Use normal principles to establish DOC
Where a claimant suffers both physical and psychiatric harm, the latter is part of the claim for physical harm
:red_cross:
Is it reasonably forseeable that the defendant would suffer
personal
injury? (
Page v Smith
)
:check:
Was the claimant either a) objectively exposed to physical danger or b) not in danger, but reasonably believed that they were? (
White v CC of South Yorkshire Police
)
:red_cross:
:check:
PRIMARY VICTIM
:red_cross:
Is it reasonably forseeable that a person of ordinary fortitute would suffer psychiatric damage? (
Bourhill v Young
)
:check:
Did the claimant have a proximate relationship with the ‘immediate victim’ of a shocking incident based on close ties of love and affection? (
Alcock v CC of South Yorks Police
)
2 more items...
:red_cross:
No DOC
e.g. Organic depression-
Hinz v Berry
or
Pathological grief (
Vernon v Bosley)
or miscarriage (
Bourhill v Young)
or personality disorder (
Chadwick v British Railways Board
) or PTSD (
Leach v CC of Gloucestershire Constabulary
)
NOT: normal grief (
Vernon v Bosley
) or distress (
Kralj v McGrath
)