Self-test questions: Psychiatric Injuries

. Lily is involved in a road traffic accident in which her husband Joseph is killed. She experiences a range of issues following the accident; grief, anxiety, distress, sorrow and anger. Which of those conditions would she be able to recover damages for?

Grief

Anxiety

Distress

Sorrow

Anger

. Harrison's son is involved in an accident caused by the Defendant's negligence, and he spends 2 weeks sitting at the child's bedside in hospital before his son dies. Can Harrison bring a claim for damages for the severe anxiety that he suffers?

Yes, Harrison has suffered a recognised psychiatric injury caused by the Defendant's negligence.

Yes, Harrison has suffered a recognised and prolonged psychiatric injury which is more than minimal.

Yes, Harrison has suffered a recognised psychiatric injury brought on by the sudden shock of seeing his son in hospital.

No, Harrison has not suffered a recognised psychiatric injury.

No, Harrison has suffered a recognised psychiatric injury but it is not the result of the impact of a sudden event or its immediate aftermath, but a prolonged exposure to a situation.

. Henry & Freda are aged 70, and are trapped in a lift for 3 hours due to the negligence of the building owner in maintaining it. They were both very scared and Freda suffered from claustrophobia as she felt trapped and unable to get out. What is the correct statement of law?

They can both claim damages for the fear and claustrophobia.

Freda can claim damages for the claustrophobia, but Henry can't claim for the fear.

Freda can claim damages for the claustrophobia, but Henry can only claim for the fear of observing his loved one suffer (as a secondary victim).

Freda can claim damages for the claustrophobia, but Henry can only claim if he had sufficient ties of love and affection to Freda.

Neither can claim damages for fear or claustrophobia.

. Which is the best definition of a primary victim?

A claimant who is physically injured.

A claimant who suffers a psychiatric injury.

A claimant who suffers nervous shock but no physical injury.

A claimant who may or may not be physically injured but was in danger of physical injury.

A claimant who is not physically injured and was not in danger of physical injury.

. Which is the best definition of a secondary victim?

A claimant who is physically injured.

A claimant who is not physically injured and was not in danger of physical injury, but for whom physical injury was foreseeable.

A claimant who is not physically injured and was not in danger of physical injury, but for whom psychiatric injury was foreseeable.

A claimant who may or may not be physically injured but was in danger of physical injury.

A claimant who is not physically injured and was not in danger of physical injury, but no injury needs to be foreseeable.

. What is the leading case setting out the requirements for admissible claims for secondary victims of psychiatric injury?

Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1991]

White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1999]

McLoughlin v O'Brian [1983]

Page v Smith [1995]

Dulieu v White [1901]

. What are the Alcock criteria?

Close ties of love and affection and proximity in time and space.

Close ties of love and affection, proximity in time and space and suffered psychiatric injury due to what they had seen or heard (suddenness).

Close ties of love and affection and suffered psychiatric injury due to what they had seen or heard (suddenness).

Close ties of love and affection, proximity in time and space and reasonableness of the response.

Close ties of love and affection, reasonableness of the response and suffered psychiatric injury due to what they had seen or heard (suddenness).

. Jeremy is watching a live television show which his son Percy is appearing on. Suddenly on the screen, Jeremy sees the lighting rig fall from the set and on to Percy who is trapped underneath, screaming and evidently in pain. Jeremy suffers an extreme anxiety reaction fearing for Percy's safety. Can Jeremy claim damages for his psychiatric injury?

No, Jeremy has the required close ties of love and affection, but anxiety is not a recognised psychiatric condition.

No, Jeremy lacks the required close ties of love and affection to bring a claim.

No, Jeremy has the required close ties of love and affection, anxiety is a recognised psychiatric condition but watching events through a television screen lacks the proximity in time and space or the required level of immediacy.

Yes, Jeremy has the required close ties of love and affection, anxiety is a recognised psychiatric condition and watching events through a television screen meets the requirement of proximity in time and space.

Yes, Jeremy has the required close ties of love and affection, anxiety is a recognised psychiatric condition and watching events through a television screen meets the requirement of proximity in time and space as the immediacy requirement is met by watching live television.

. Felicia is a police officer who is called to the scene of an accident, where she has to assist victims, some of whom die at the scene. She also has to assist relatives to identify their loved ones. Felicia develops Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) following this event. Can Felicia bring a claim for damages for the PTSD that she suffers?

No, Felicia suffers from PTSD which is not a recognised psychiatric condition.

No, Felicia lacks the required close ties of love and affection to the primary victims.

No, PTSD is a recognised psychiatric condition, but Felicia cannot demonstrate the necessary proximity in time and space to the accident.

Yes, PTSD is a recognised psychiatric condition, Felicia was proximate in the immediate aftermath of the accident and helping the loved ones satisfies the close ties of love and affection.

Yes, as Felicia is present at the scene of the accident, she is a primary victim, so can recover for her PTSD.

. Arya is involved in a road traffic accident which was caused by the Defendant's negligence, she suffers whiplash injuries to her neck and back and develops depression as a result of the accident, which persists for a number of years. Can Arya claim damages for her psychiatric injuries (namely the depression)?

No, Arya was not a secondary victim so is unable to claim damages for psychiatric injuries.

No, Arya was not in the zone of danger, therefore she cannot recover damages for her psychiatric injuries.

Yes, Arya was a primary victim and was physically injured, so the psychiatric harm is deemed to be a natural and probable consequence of this, so she can recover damages.

Yes, Arya was a primary victim who escaped physical injury, but is able to claim damages for her psychiatric injuries.

Yes, Arya meets the Alcock criteria for secondary victims, and is therefore able to claim damages for psychiatric injuries.

. Sansa tripped over a broken paving slab on the path surrounding a lake whilst walking through the grounds of Foxhill Park, she fell into the water and feared that she might drown. Sansa has subsequently developed Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and suffers particularly when she is near open water, which is problematic as she works at the seaside. The broken paving slab was due to the negligence of the Park's maintenance and grounds team who had failed to repair the slab, despite repeated complaints from park users. Can Sansa claim damages for her psychiatric injuries (namely the PTSD)?

No, Sansa was not a secondary victim so is unable to claim damages for psychiatric injuries.

No, Sansa was not in the zone of danger, therefore she cannot recover damages for her psychiatric injuries.

Yes, Sansa was a primary victim and was physically injured, so the psychiatric harm is deemed to be a natural and probable consequence of this, so she can recover damages.

Yes, Sansa was a primary victim who escaped physical injury, but is able to claim damages for her psychiatric injuries.

Yes, Sansa meets the Alcock criteria for secondary victims, and is therefore able to claim damages for psychiatric injuries.

. Rob is a father of 3 children, who takes them on a cycle ride to their local park. The children ride ahead with Rob some distance behind, and they move out of sight. Rob sees a car driver negligently lose control of his vehicle and the car is moving in the same direction that his children were heading. He hears a crash but can't see his children or the accident. The children are unhurt, but Rob suffers an extreme anxiety reaction, and ongoing situational anxiety about the safety of his children. Can Rob claim damages for his psychiatric injuries?

No, Rob was not in the zone of danger, therefore he cannot recover damages for his psychiatric injuries.

No, Rob had close ties of love and affection with primary victims (his children), but as the primary victims were not physically or psychologically damaged then he cannot bring a claim.

No, Rob had close ties of love and affection with primary victims (his children) in the zone of danger, but he did not actually witness the accident so did not have sufficient proximity to recover damages as a secondary victim.

Yes, Rob is a primary victim as he suffered a psychiatric injury from witnessing the accident.

Yes, Rob is a secondary victim, he had close ties of love and affection with primary victims (his children), his proximity to the accident is sufficiently close in time and space and suffered psychiatric injuries due to what he had seen or heard.

. Kwok receives a telephone call that his twin brother Ka has been injured in a train crash and is in hospital. He rushes to the hospital and arrives within 2 hours of the accident. Kwok sees his brother covered in blood and struggling to breathe, but alive in intensive care. Kwok suffers psychiatric harm as a result of seeing his brother, suffering with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, panic attacks and flashbacks. Can Kwok recover damages from the negligent train operator for his psychiatric injuries.

No, Kwok was not in the zone of danger, so cannot recover damages for his psychiatric injuries.

No, Kwok lacks the close ties of love and affection between himself and his brother, so cannot claim as a secondary victim for his psychiatric injuries.

No, Kwok has the necessary close ties of love and affection, but lacked the required level of proximity in time and space to the accident as he only saw the aftermath, so cannot claim as a secondary victim.

Yes, Kwok can claim as he was a primary victim suffering psychiatric injuries as a result of the Defendant's negligence.

Yes, Kwok has the necessary close ties of love and affection, his proximity in time and space is satisfied by arriving during the immediate aftermath, so he can claim as a secondary victim.

. Anish is injured in a road traffic accident, which of the following people would not be assumed to have a close tie of love and affection to be able to recover for psychiatric damages as a secondary victim.

His nephew

His father

His mother

His wife

His child

. When the Court is considering the proximity in time and space criteria from Alcock, which of the following circumstances would not be sufficiently proximate for a secondary victim to recover damages for psychiatric injury (assuming that the primary and secondary victims have sufficiently close ties of love and affection)?

The parent who sees an accident about to happen to their children, when the accident occurs out of sight.

The parent who arrives at the hospital after 24 hours of an accident involving their child.

The parent who arrives at the hospital after 1 hour of an accident involving their child.

The parent who witnesses an accident involving their child in front of them.

The parent who arrives at the scene of an accident involving their child 30 minutes after it happened.

Quiz Content