Defendants negligence causing nervous shock or psychiatric injury to plaintiff/claimant: a critical appraisal

In the common law jurisdictions including Malaysia, the tort of negligence is based on the existence of a duty of care owed by the defendant to the plaintiff/claimant. The law has developed over time to include many instances where duty of care exists. Psychiatric injury is an aspect of negligence c...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors:	Shair Mohamad, Mohd Akram, Sardar Baig, Farheen Baig
Format:	Conference or Workshop Item
Language:	English English
Published:	International Organization Center of Academic Research (OCERINT) Publishing 2017
Subjects:	K Law (General)
Online Access:	http://irep.iium.edu.my/55728/ http://irep.iium.edu.my/55728/ http://irep.iium.edu.my/55728/1/55728_Defendants%20Negligence%20Causing%20Nervous%20Shock.pdf http://irep.iium.edu.my/55728/7/55728%20Defendants%20negligence%20causing%20nervous%20shock%20or%20psychiatric%20WOS.pdf

id	iium-55728
recordtype	eprints
spelling	iium-557282019-08-17T08:55:50Z http://irep.iium.edu.my/55728/ Defendants negligence causing nervous shock or psychiatric injury to plaintiff/claimant: a critical appraisal Shair Mohamad, Mohd Akram Sardar Baig, Farheen Baig K Law (General) In the common law jurisdictions including Malaysia, the tort of negligence is based on the existence of a duty of care owed by the defendant to the plaintiff/claimant. The law has developed over time to include many instances where duty of care exists. Psychiatric injury is an aspect of negligence concerned with mental harm which has been caused through the negligent act of another. The essential question to be asked is the degree of proximity which is required when a person has suffered psychiatric damage as a result of the defendant’s negligent act. Initially the plaintiff could only succeed if he was also within the range of physical impact, i.e. only the ‘primary’ victim could sue. Later liability was extended to secondary victim. The appropriate test became foreseeability of the shock, but the problem is when shock is foreseeable? It is suggested the court in fact created ‘sub-rules’ or guidelines which indicated the kind of cases where proximity in the legal sense would exist. In Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1991] WLR 1057, the House of Lords appears to have adopted a compromise position whereby the test is one of ‘foresight’, but one where foresight has a coded meaning. So where the plaintiff has suffered psychiatric damage the test of proximity which is required to establish a duty of care is ‘foresight’ as determined in the light of the relevant guidelines, as to whether victim is the primary victim. The paper aims to give a critical appraisal of the unsatisfactory state of the law particularly in the case of secondary victim, suggesting reform in the light of many criticisms by leading authorities. International Organization Center of Academic Research (OCERINT) Publishing 2017-02 Conference or Workshop Item PeerReviewed application/pdf en http://irep.iium.edu.my/55728/1/55728_Defendants%20Negligence%20Causing%20Nervous%20Shock.pdf application/pdf en http://irep.iium.edu.my/55728/7/55728%20Defendants%20negligence%20causing%20nervous%20shock%20or%20psychiatric%20WOS.pdf Shair Mohamad, Mohd Akram and Sardar Baig, Farheen Baig (2017) Defendants negligence causing nervous shock or psychiatric injury to plaintiff/claimant: a critical appraisal. In: 4th International Conference on Education and Social Sciences (INTCESS 2017), 6th-8th February 2017, Istanbul, Turkey. http://www.ocerint.org/intcess17_epublication/papers/161.pdf
repository_type	Digital Repository
institution_category	Local University
institution	International Islamic University Malaysia
building	IIUM Repository
collection	Online Access
language	English English
topic	K Law (General)
spellingShingle	K Law (General) Shair Mohamad, Mohd Akram Sardar Baig, Farheen Baig Defendants negligence causing nervous shock or psychiatric injury to plaintiff/claimant: a critical appraisal
description	In the common law jurisdictions including Malaysia, the tort of negligence is based on the existence of a duty of care owed by the defendant to the plaintiff/claimant. The law has developed over time to include many instances where duty of care exists. Psychiatric injury is an aspect of negligence concerned with mental harm which has been caused through the negligent act of another. The essential question to be asked is the degree of proximity which is required when a person has suffered psychiatric damage as a result of the defendant’s negligent act. Initially the plaintiff could only succeed if he was also within the range of physical impact, i.e. only the ‘primary’ victim could sue. Later liability was extended to secondary victim. The appropriate test became foreseeability of the shock, but the problem is when shock is foreseeable? It is suggested the court in fact created ‘sub-rules’ or guidelines which indicated the kind of cases where proximity in the legal sense would exist. In Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1991] WLR 1057, the House of Lords appears to have adopted a compromise position whereby the test is one of ‘foresight’, but one where foresight has a coded meaning. So where the plaintiff has suffered psychiatric damage the test of proximity which is required to establish a duty of care is ‘foresight’ as determined in the light of the relevant guidelines, as to whether victim is the primary victim. The paper aims to give a critical appraisal of the unsatisfactory state of the law particularly in the case of secondary victim, suggesting reform in the light of many criticisms by leading authorities.
format	Conference or Workshop Item
author	Shair Mohamad, Mohd Akram Sardar Baig, Farheen Baig
author_facet	Shair Mohamad, Mohd Akram Sardar Baig, Farheen Baig
author_sort	Shair Mohamad, Mohd Akram
title	Defendants negligence causing nervous shock or psychiatric injury to plaintiff/claimant: a critical appraisal
title_short	Defendants negligence causing nervous shock or psychiatric injury to plaintiff/claimant: a critical appraisal
title_full	Defendants negligence causing nervous shock or psychiatric injury to plaintiff/claimant: a critical appraisal
title_fullStr	Defendants negligence causing nervous shock or psychiatric injury to plaintiff/claimant: a critical appraisal
title_full_unstemmed	Defendants negligence causing nervous shock or psychiatric injury to plaintiff/claimant: a critical appraisal
title_sort	defendants negligence causing nervous shock or psychiatric injury to plaintiff/claimant: a critical appraisal
publisher	International Organization Center of Academic Research (OCERINT) Publishing
publishDate	2017
url	http://irep.iium.edu.my/55728/ http://irep.iium.edu.my/55728/ http://irep.iium.edu.my/55728/1/55728_Defendants%20Negligence%20Causing%20Nervous%20Shock.pdf http://irep.iium.edu.my/55728/7/55728%20Defendants%20negligence%20causing%20nervous%20shock%20or%20psychiatric%20WOS.pdf
first_indexed	2023-09-18T21:18:42Z
last_indexed	2023-09-18T21:18:42Z
_version_	1777411736028053504

Defendants negligence causing nervous shock or psychiatric injury to plaintiff/claimant: a critical appraisal

Similar Items