Chapter 11 The Tort of Negligence - OED-update - Oxford University ...

Chapter 11 The Tort of Negligence 361
Decision: The court awarded the claimant damages since her loss was reasonably foreseeable
and the scene that greeted the claimant when she arrived at the hospital constituted the ‘immediate
aftermath’.
For public policy reasons, it is important to make certain that the duty of care, imposed on
defendants, for psychiatric injury caused to secondary victims is restricted within reasonable
confines. There are legal limitations on the claims of secondary victims. In the important
case of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police (1992) the House of Lords set
out the criteria necessary for a defendant to be liable for psychiatric injury caused to a
secondary victim.
The claimant must establish all of the following essential requirements:
• A close tie of love and affection with someone involved in the accident so that it is
reasonably foreseeable that the claimant will suffer psychiatric illness. (A close tie of
love and affection is presumed to exist between spouses, and parents and children,
but other claimants must prove such a relationship exists.)
• A geographical proximity to the accident or its aftermath. The claimant must be
either present at the scene of the accident, see the build up to the accident, or its
immediate effects. The claimant must have seen or heard the accident or the immediate
aftermath with his own unaided senses. (The claimant will not be successful if
he has imagined the scene after being told of it by a third party or if he has seen the
incident on television.)
• A medically-recognised psychiatric illness is suffered by the claimant as a result of
the incident.
Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire (1991)
Facts: Ninety-five people were killed and numerous others were injured in the Hillsborough
football ground when the defendants, South Yorkshire Police, negligently allowed too many
supporters into the football ground and people at the front were crushed against the barriers.
The scene was witnessed by the claimants, who were friends and relatives of the persons
injured. Some claimants were at the ground while others saw the events on the television or
heard them described on the radio. All the claimants suffered psychiatric illness.
Decision: In order to succeed in a claim for psychiatric illness, the relationship between the
claimant and the primary victims had to be sufficiently proximate. There had to be close ties of
love and affection. Two claimants who were in the ground were unsuccessful in their claim