8 - TORT - Psychiatric

Question 1

What are the basic requirements for claims for psychiatric harm?

Answer 1

• Suffered from a medically recognised psychiatric illness or
• shock induced physical condition
  2. Categorise claimant

Question 2

What is not sufficient to prove a medically recognised psych illness (for psych harm claims)?

Answer 2

• Grief
• Isolated flashbacks
• Fear
• Distress

Question 3

What are the different categories of claimant?

Answer 3

• Actual Victim
• Primary Victim: someone caught up in incident but escapes physical injury, but suffers psych harm due to reasonable fear for their own safety
• Secondary Victim: not caught up in incident & no physical harm, but suffer psych harm due to fear for someone else’s safety
• Beyond primary & secondary victims: where D assumed responsibility to ensure C avoids reasonably foreseeable psych harm

Question 4

What are the requirements for a primary victim?

Answer 4

• does not suffer physical harm
• involved in the traumatic event and in the danger zone 💥
• reasonable fear for their own physical safety caused psychiatric harm 😱🤪
• Psychiatric harm must be shock-induced ⚡️🤪

Question 5

What is the DoC for primary victims

Answer 5

• D.o.C if D reasonably must have foreseen the risk of physical injury

Question 6

Does D need to have reasonably foreseen psychiatric injury for primary victim?

Answer 6

No - reasonable foresee physical injury is enough

Question 7

What are the cases on primary victims?

Answer 7

• D crashed through wall of pregnant barmaid’s pub - feared for physical safety so primary victim 🤰🍻🚖
• passenger in a car crash, unharmed but caused a worsening of mental illness - primary victim 🚖💥
• firefighter sought to help colleagues in a burning building - at risk therefore primary victim. 👨‍🚒🔥

Question 8

Who is a secondary victim?

Answer 8

• not in danger zone
• fears for someone else’s safety

Question 9

What are the requirements for a secondary victim?

Answer 9

1. Psych harm reasonably foreseeable in person of ordinary fortitude in same circumstances (note: diff to primary which only requires physical harm)
   🧐😉🤪
2. Proximity of relationship between C & victim: one of close ties & affection; rebuttably presumed for parent/child; husband/wife & engaged couples 👨‍👩‍👧‍👦
3. Proximity in time & space: must be presence at scene/immediate aftermath & must see/hear it 🕰️🪐
4. Injury result of sudden shock ⚡️
5. Fair, just & reasonable ⚖️🧑‍⚖️

Question 10

What are the cases for the secondary victim?

Answer 10

• Man on rescue boat for oil rig disaster at a safe distance. Not proximate 🛢️🚣
• Woman saw mild aftermath of crash and miscarried. not foreseeable that person of a normal fortitude would suffer. 🤰🚙🤪
• saw aftermath of crash of family 2 hrs afterwards
• negligent medical treatment led to death of baby over 36 hrs - considered a series of sudden events. Sudden shock
  👶🧑‍⚕️📉☠️✅
• father saw son in intensive care over 2 weeks and gradually realised negligent medical treatment. Not sudden shock
  👶🧑‍⚕️📉🕰️☠️❌
• D in accident of his own making, father fire officer responded. Cannot claim where D is the object of affection.
  🧑‍🚒🚕💥👶❌

Question 11

What are occupational stress claims?

Answer 11

Pysch harm caused by work stress:
1. Psych harm reasonably foreseeable to employer
2. Foreseeability depends on relationship between C’s characteristics & employer’s requirements (nature of work, signs of stress, size/scope of business/availability of resources)