Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1991] UKHL 5
Citation:Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1991] UKHL 5
Rule of thumb:If relatives witness an act of negligence causing other loved family life-threatening or serious injuries, but were not actually in danger themselves & were not there in the immediate aftermath, only seeing it through television/radio, are they entitled to damages if they suffer psychiatric injuries? No, loved ones not in danger are not entitled to damages for psychiatric injuries in these. For example, the people in the stadium at Hillsborough, or the people who watched it on live TV, are not entitled to damages.
Background facts:
The basic facts were that the claimants had been family members of people killed & severely injured at the Hillsborough disaster, but only witnessed this through the television/radio, not being there in the immediate aftermath.
Judgment:
The Court held that this did not meet the test for nervous shock. The Court held there was a 5 point test.
Such persons must establish: • Shocking injuries to the victim. • Close tie of love and affection to the victim. • Actually visit to see the victim’s injuries themselves in the immediate aftermath. • Actually go to the hospital and are part of the injury treatment process • Immediate onset of actual psychiatric injuries diagnosed and prescribed with medical treatment by a doctor.
Ratio-decidendi:
‘(i)(The claimant who is a) "secondary victim" (must directly witness a) "shocking event" "immediate aftermath’ (ii) "sudden" (and not a) "gradual" (onset of symptoms) (iii) "sufficiently proximate" (relationship to person deemed to be) "close tie of love and affection". (iv) (reasonably foreseeable that a person of) "normal fortitude (would suffer damage)" )( v) "take his victim as he finds him"’, Lord Keith of Kinkel
Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.