Home / Summaries / Tort Lecture 2 - Damage / result-suffered-harm

Damages

4 important questions on Damages

Can a secondary victim recover when injury to teh primary party is self-inflicted?

Where the injury to the primary victim is self-inflicted, the case of Greatorex v Greatorex (2000) establishes that the secondary victim will not be allowed to recover – on policy grounds. The case concerned a father (a firefighter) who witnessed the death of his son in a drunk driving accident.

When can medically recognised emotional /psych harm be compensated?

Medically recognised Emotional or psychological harm can be compensated when they are a result of a traumatic or ‘shocking’ event
e.g. PTSD, ‘organic depression’ & ‘pathological grief disorder’
Butchart v Home Office (2006) concerned the claimant who was a prisoner, known to be at risk of suicide. He occupied a cell with another known suicide risk. The cellmate hung himself and this was seen by the claimant, who suffered shock as a result and was allowed to recover damages.

Give an example of a case in which the claimant who argued that she suffered psychological harm as a result of brooding on the possibility of contracting a serious illness. Which principle did this illustrate?

Johnston v NEI International combustion Ltd (2007),
Claimant was exposed to asbestos for her job, She then developed Pleural Plaques in her body, which in themselves were not harmful but made her worry about teh risk of contracting cancer. She argued that she suffered psychological harm as a result of brooding on the possibility of contracting a serious illness.

What was established in Page v Smith, what year did it happen?

Page v Smith(1996)
The plaintiff, Mr Page, was involved in a minor car accident, and was physically unhurt in the collision. However the crash did result in a recurrence of myalgic encephalomyelitis (Chronic fatigue syndrome) from which he had suffered for 20 years but was then in remission. Thedefendant admitted that he had been negligent, but said he was not liable for the psychiatric damage as it was unforeseeable and therefore not recoverable as a head of damage.

The question on the page originate from the summary of the following study material:

Tort Lecture 2 - Damage

View summary