Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Year 2 Tort Law > Negligence and Psychiatric Harm > Flashcards

Negligence and Psychiatric Harm Flashcards

1
Q

what is the normative question?

A

should judges pursue corrective justice notwithstanding the fact that the upshot may be an uncertain body of law?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

what did the OG case Hinz say?

A
  • only claim for recognised psych injury

- damages not awarded fro grief or sorrow from someone’s death

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

what pro claimant development case where van drives into pub and causes woman to miscarry - claim succeeds as physical zone of risks must be reasonable fear to ones safety?

A

Duljeu v white

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

who said that ever since Duljeu the problem has been defining the outer limit of liability?

A

Flemming

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

case where truck injured child, and court said C can apprehend danger through her ‘own unaided senses’?

A

Hambrook

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what controversial case conflicted with Hambrook where a taxi slowing backing over child and mother hearing child’s screams wasn’t considered reasonable foreseeable harm?

A

King

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

who criticized the King case saying a child being slowly run over being less likely to cause shock is unrealistic?

A

Linden

canadian tort law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

which case gives the immediate aftermath test of lord Wilberforce?

A
  • McLoughlin
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

what happened in the Mcloughlin case?

A
  • c husband and kids in accident, one kid died and other badly injured
    C told 2 hours later
  • first said insufficient proximity for the claim
  • but house of lords approved claim
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what was Wilberforce’s immediate aftermath test?

A
  • the closer the tie, the more powerful the claim for compensation will be (relationship);
    (ii) proximity in time and space (and the immediate aftermath doctrine);
    (iii) means of communication (apprehension (shock) through one’s own unaided senses).
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

what did Flemming say about the immediate aftermath test?

A
  • shows a new permissiveness in negligence law
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

what assumption did Alcock case establish in relation to first part of Immediate aftermath test?

A
  • spouses, parents, and children: close ties of love and affection presumed to exist. (but can be rebutted)
  • In all other cases, C must prove that a special relationship of love and affection exists.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

what was the Hillsborough case that said identifying the body 8 hours later placed C outside the immediate aftermath (obiter)?

(protectionist, don’t want these claims coming to court)

A

Alcock

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

what is the policy for television broadcast and psych harm?

A
  • for Hillsborough not apprehension through unaided senses

- liability may arise is broadcaster breaches relevant guidelines and shows scenes of individual suffering

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

which Australian case for television broadcasts asks ‘was there perception of the distressing phenomenon’?

A

Coffey

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

what is the case for rescuers where c helped in aftermath of the train disaster and got compo - nothing should be done to discourage resuers

A

Chadwick

crash in 1957

17
Q

What happened in the ‘breaking new ground case’ of Attia v British Gas?

A
  • C house burn down due to negligence if def’s workmen
  • got compo
  • parties in commercial relation so high proximity existed
18
Q

Case for eggshell skull principle and what happened?

A

Mount Isa Mines

  • C saw colleague in flames
  • shock to normal person foreseeable
  • C reaction very severe
  • principle applied
19
Q

who described Mcloughlin case as reflecting judicial conservatism and caution?

A

Robertson 1994

20
Q

what happened in Page (start of primary/ secondary victim distinction)?

A
  • in accident with no physical injury
  • falls victim to ME that was in remission before accident (eggshell skull applicable)
  • COA reject as mental harm not reason foreseeable
  • HOL approve claim saying he was primary victim so mental harm need not be reasonably foreseeable
  • foreseeable physical injury enough to ground claim
21
Q

what did Page case say about secondary victims?

A
  • suffers psych injury after witnessing or being informed of accident
  • control devices from Alcock and Mcloughlin to limit claims)
22
Q

what was the Hillsborough case where officers claim as secondary victims was rejected as they were not close enough to def and rescuers could only be prim victims?

A

White

23
Q

who spoke of distributive justice in the Hillsborough case of White saying if the claimants in Alcock weren’t successful the officers should bear the same burden?

A

John Rawls

24
Q

what did Lord Hoffman say about distributive justice in White?

A
  • idea that cases should be treated alike

- no imbalance in accepting weaker claims when stronger ones have been rejected (Alcock and White)

25
Q

Why did Lord Goff dissent in White?

A
  • ruling turns reasonable foreseeability of physical harm into a ‘necessary condition’ of liability
  • wrong to say they weren’t rescuers as psychical danger never a requirement in Chadwick
26
Q

which case supports Goff’s dissent about rescuers in the White case and what happened?

A
  • Wagner (1921)
  • suffer psych injury from searching for cousins body with large risk of physical harm
  • Goff say its narrowing what is acceptable
27
Q

what are the competing policy claims in White?

A
  • Steyn say need to avoid imbalance and flood of claims

- Goff say should support searchers and rescuers

28
Q

what did Lord Steyn say about developing law beyond White?

A
  • has to be left to parliament

- reached the end of the line with case law

29
Q

what is another case of arbitrary line drawing like White where there was an explosion in mine due to negligence and C thought he was the cause so developed depression - deemed not to be primary victim as no real physical risk?

A

Hunter v British Coal

30
Q

which case said categorization of primary and secondary victims is not closed?

A

W v Essex

31
Q

who said in a 2001 lecture that these crude distinctions of physical risk and immediacy are likely to dominate tort?

A

Lord Steyn

32
Q

What did Steele say about occupational stress claims?

A
  • would be primary victims even without physical danger

- should be treated as distinct type of claim

33
Q

which Australian case went against drawing arbitrary lines in shock cases and what happened?

A

Annetts

  • young farmer boy go missing
  • parents suffer psych injury after agonising process of being phoned and later shows pic of skeleton
  • court said neither sudden shock or direct perception required
34
Q

what happened in the Pleural Plaques case of Johnston?

A
  • thickening of lungs give risk to stress and anxiety
  • wouldn’t use Page to help C as would be extension of law
  • Lord Hope used white case to say they won’t develop the law any further here
35
Q

how was Page distinguished from Johnson?

significant of word ‘event’

A
  • Page to do with event (like collision) that can could physical or psych injury
  • PP case different as did not arise from event that already happened, its just fear it may occur
36
Q

what happened in the expansive secondary victim case of Crystal Taylor at trial judge?

A
  • woman in accident at work, unexpectedly die 3 weeks later, daughter see death and suffer PTSD
  • def appeal treating accident as significant event so no proximity
  • trial said sig event was sudden death of mother so no gap between relevant event and harm suffered
37
Q

what did COA say about Crystal Taylor case?

A
  • to allow recovery as secondary victim would allows liability arose months or years after def’s wrongdoing
  • courts should not make any substantial developments, leave to parl

Year 2 Tort Law (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions