Claims for psychiatric harm - Rescuers and bystanders

Learning Outcomes

After reading this article, you will be able to explain the legal requirements for claims for psychiatric harm by rescuers and bystanders, distinguish between primary and secondary victims, and apply the correct legal tests to scenarios involving rescuers and bystanders. You will also be able to identify the limits of liability and the policy reasons behind the current approach, as required for SQE1.

SQE1 Syllabus

For SQE1, you are required to understand the legal framework for claims for psychiatric harm, especially as it applies to rescuers and bystanders. In your revision, focus on:

• the distinction between primary and secondary victims in psychiatric harm claims
• the legal status and requirements for rescuers to claim for psychiatric harm
• the strict criteria for bystanders and the policy reasons for limiting liability
• how to apply the relevant legal rules and principles to realistic problem scenarios

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. What must a rescuer show to be classified as a primary victim in a psychiatric harm claim?
2. Which legal test determines whether a bystander can recover for psychiatric harm?
3. True or false? A bystander who witnesses a traumatic event involving strangers can claim for psychiatric harm if the harm was foreseeable.
4. What is the main policy reason for restricting claims for psychiatric harm by bystanders?

Introduction

Claims for psychiatric harm by rescuers and bystanders are tightly controlled in English law. The courts have developed strict rules to limit liability for psychiatric injury, especially where the claimant is not physically injured. Understanding the distinction between primary and secondary victims, and the special position of rescuers and bystanders, is essential for SQE1.

Rescuers and Psychiatric Harm

Rescuers are people who attempt to help others in danger or distress following an incident caused by the defendant’s negligence. The courts have historically shown sympathy to rescuers, but the current law sets clear limits on when a rescuer can recover for psychiatric harm.

Key Term: rescuer
A person who voluntarily attempts to assist or save others in danger as a result of the defendant’s negligence.

To succeed in a claim for psychiatric harm, a rescuer must be classified as a primary victim or satisfy the strict requirements for secondary victims.

Key Term: primary victim
An individual directly involved in an incident, who is physically injured or placed in danger of physical injury by the defendant’s negligence.

If a rescuer is exposed to actual or reasonably perceived danger of physical injury, they are treated as a primary victim. In this case, it is enough that physical injury was foreseeable, even if only psychiatric harm occurs.

Key Term: secondary victim
A person who suffers psychiatric harm as a result of witnessing injury to others, but who is not themselves in physical danger.

If a rescuer is not exposed to danger, they are treated as a secondary victim and must satisfy the strict control mechanisms for secondary victims.

Worked Example 1.1

A police officer attends the scene of a major accident and helps victims, but is never in physical danger. He later develops post-traumatic stress disorder. Can he claim for psychiatric harm?

Answer: The officer is not a primary victim because he was not in danger. He is a secondary victim and must meet the Alcock criteria (close tie of love and affection, proximity, direct perception, and foreseeability). As he is unlikely to satisfy these, his claim will fail.

The Modern Approach: White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police

The leading case is White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police. The House of Lords held that rescuers who are not in actual or reasonably perceived danger cannot claim as primary victims. They must instead meet the requirements for secondary victims, which are rarely satisfied.

Exam Warning

The courts no longer give rescuers special status for psychiatric harm claims. Unless the rescuer is in danger, they must satisfy the same strict criteria as any other secondary victim.

Bystanders and Psychiatric Harm

Bystanders are people who witness traumatic events but have no close relationship with the victims and are not in danger themselves. The courts are reluctant to allow claims by bystanders for psychiatric harm.

Key Term: bystander
A person who witnesses an incident but is not involved, not in danger, and has no close relationship with the victims.

The courts require bystanders to satisfy the secondary victim criteria, which include:

• a close tie of love and affection with the primary victim
• proximity to the event or its immediate aftermath
• direct perception of the event (not via media)
• foreseeability of psychiatric harm in a person of normal fortitude

If these are not met, the claim will fail.

Worked Example 1.2

A passer-by witnesses a serious car accident involving strangers and later suffers psychiatric illness. Can she claim for psychiatric harm?

Answer: No. As a bystander with no close relationship to the victims, she cannot satisfy the secondary victim criteria. Her claim will fail.

Sudden Shock Requirement

The psychiatric harm must result from a sudden, shocking event. Gradual development of psychiatric illness from ongoing exposure will not suffice.

Key Term: sudden shock
A psychiatric injury caused by a single, traumatic event, rather than by a gradual process.

Policy Reasons for Limiting Claims

The courts restrict claims by rescuers (not in danger) and bystanders to avoid unlimited liability and to keep the scope of duty of care manageable. The law aims to balance fairness to claimants with the need to prevent an unmanageable number of claims.

Revision Tip

For SQE1, always check whether the claimant was in physical danger (primary victim) or is a secondary victim. Only primary victims can claim without meeting the strict secondary victim criteria.

Summary

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• The distinction between primary and secondary victims is essential in psychiatric harm claims.
• Rescuers can claim as primary victims only if they are in actual or reasonably perceived danger.
• Rescuers not in danger and bystanders are treated as secondary victims and must satisfy strict criteria.
• The courts require a close tie of love and affection, proximity, direct perception, and foreseeability for secondary victims.
• Policy reasons limit claims by rescuers (not in danger) and bystanders to prevent unlimited liability.

Key Terms and Concepts

• rescuer
• primary victim
• secondary victim
• bystander
• sudden shock