1-20 of 26 Results

  • Keyword: psychiatric injury x
Clear all

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Frost (or White) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 AC 455. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Frost (or White) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 AC 455. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Frost (or White) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 AC 455. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

This chapter begins by explaining the meaning of psychiatric harm. It then discusses the general exclusionary rule; the distinction between ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ victims; and other circumstances where the law recognises victims of psychiatric harms as having a claim in negligence (rescuers, involuntary participants, communicators of shocking news, self-harm by the defendant and ‘assumption of responsibility’ cases). Though initially psychiatric harm was recoverable only if accompanied by physical injury, it is now clear that the claimant can recover for pure psychiatric harm so long as it is a recognised psychiatric illness. It is not, therefore, possible to recover in the tort of negligence for mere grief, anxiety or distress.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Rothwell v Chemical & Insulating Co Ltd [2008] 1 AC 281. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Rothwell v Chemical & Insulating Co. Ltd [2008] 1 AC 281. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Rothwell v Chemical & Insulating Co. Ltd [2008] 1 AC 281. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Page v Smith [1996] 1 AC 155. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Page v Smith [1996] 1 AC 155. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Page v Smith [1996] 1 AC 155. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. The tort of negligence originated as a remedy for property damage and physical injury. However, recovery of compensation for psychiatric injury and pure economic loss, in cases where they were not caused by physical injury or property damage, has proved difficult. Duty of care for psychiatric injury is contingent upon whether the claimant is a primary or secondary victim. This chapter discusses the policy reasons for limiting duty of care for psychiatric injury, the mechanisms by which the law limits duty of care for psychiatric injury, the meaning of ‘pure economic loss’, and the development of the Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd (1964) principle of liability for negligent statements. The chapter also examines the ‘thin skull’ rule, which applies to psychiatric injury in the same way as to physical injury.

Chapter

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. The tort of negligence originated as a remedy for property damage and physical injury. However, recovery of compensation for psychiatric injury and pure economic loss, in cases where they were not caused by physical injury or property damage, has proved difficult. Duty of care for psychiatric injury is contingent upon whether the claimant is a primary or secondary victim. This chapter discusses the policy reasons for limiting duty of care for psychiatric injury, the mechanisms by which the law limits duty of care for psychiatric injury, the meaning of ‘pure economic loss’, and the development of the Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd (1964) principle of liability for negligent statements. The chapter also examines the ‘thin skull’ rule, which applies to psychiatric injury in the same way as to physical injury.

Chapter

This chapter begins by explaining the meaning of psychiatric harm. It then discusses the general exclusionary rule; the distinction between ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ victims; and other circumstances where the law recognises victims of psychiatric harms as having a claim in negligence (rescuers, involuntary participants, communicators of shocking news, self-harm by the defendant and ‘assumption of responsibility’ cases). Though initially psychiatric harm was recoverable only if accompanied by physical injury, it is now clear that the claimant can recover for pure psychiatric harm so long as it is a recognised psychiatric illness. It is not, therefore, possible to recover in the tort of negligence for mere grief, anxiety or distress.

Chapter

This chapter discusses the duties of care in negligence that must be pleaded where the claimant has suffered some kind of personal injury—principally cases of bodily injury and psychiatric illness. The law imposes a wide duty with respect to persons who are physically proximate and vulnerable to injury. The law imposes a wide duty of care also upon persons who imperil others’ physical safety and cause them, as persons in the ‘zone of danger’, to suffer psychiatric illness. By contrast, the law has imposed certain ‘control mechanisms’ on the duty of care as it applies to secondary victims (who were outside the zone of danger but have suffered psychiatric injury). These mechanisms involve stringent types of proximity (as to relationships, presence, and sensory experience) in addition to the requirement of foreseeability to persons of the type of psychiatric illness.

Chapter

Celebrated for their conceptual clarity, titles in the Clarendon Law Series offer concise, accessible overviews of major fields of law and legal thought. This chapter discusses the tort of negligence. It elaborates on duty of care based on foreseeability, proximity, assumption of responsibility, property damage and personal injury, purely economic harm, psychiatric harm, less serious upset, and liability for omissions. It argues that the common law duty is higher when it requires a person to take active steps to protect others than when it requires only that he refrain from positively causing an injury. But once it is held that a duty exists, its level is always, apparently, the same: it is the duty to take such care as in all the circumstances of the case is reasonable.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in McLoughlin v O’Brian [1983] 1 AC 410. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.

Chapter

Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Wilkinson v Downton [1897] QB 57. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.