PSYCHATRIC INJURY QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS PASS GUARANTEED 100% ✅
What is the first criteria in establishing a Psychatric injury claim? - Answer ✅Must have a
recognised psychiatric illness
> Hicks v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1992] - Terror was normal human emotion, not
given
Sorrow and Grief are not enough
> Hinz v Berry {1970]
What are the policy rationales on limiting PI claims established by Lord Steyn? - Answer ✅>
Greater diagnostic uncertainty
> Floodgates
> Litigation may prolonged recovery
What is a primary victim? - Answer ✅Established in Page v Smith [1996]
> Zone of danger
> Reasonably believes to be in danger
Who can be placed in the zone of danger? - Answer ✅> Anyone who enters such as rescuers
> Can be placed even if D didn't mean to put him there - Donnachie v Chief Constable of Greater
Manchester
@2025 Exam Material 1
, In part 2 of the Page test, what must the fear for own safety be? - Answer ✅> Fear for own
safety must be reasonable - Macfarlane v EE Caledonia
> Assessed objectively, case was rejected as objectovely held not to be in danger
> dont need to be in phsyciaal danger, but can reaosnbly beleive to be
PV and SV can overlap, where is this seen? - Answer ✅> Established that once in the zone of
danger you are a PV regardless of trauma
> Young v Charles Church - the reason for trauma was fear for a friend (who could be held to be
an SV) but was in the zone of danger. Was at risk
What is the shock requirement for PV's, is this generous? - Answer ✅> Sudden shock
> Gradual assaults on the mind - YAH v Medway [2019] from negligent C-section
What is the foreseeability requirement for PV's? - Answer ✅Broad category
Page v Smith [1996]
> The risk of personal injury was reasonably foreseeable
No split between PsI and PiI
> Doesnt necessarily need to be an actual injury, it just needs to be foreseeable
> Even if you suffer physical injury, you can claim psychiatric even if this wasn't foreseeable
> Based on the eggshell skull rule - we find the claimant as you find them
C suffered essentially minor injury but aggravated his previous CFS that became permanent
What are the limits to foreseeability for PV's - Answer ✅> You cannot claim as a PV under Page
lines for fear of injury in the future
> Cant claim for an event that hasn't happened yet
@2025 Exam Material 2
ANSWERS PASS GUARANTEED 100% ✅
What is the first criteria in establishing a Psychatric injury claim? - Answer ✅Must have a
recognised psychiatric illness
> Hicks v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1992] - Terror was normal human emotion, not
given
Sorrow and Grief are not enough
> Hinz v Berry {1970]
What are the policy rationales on limiting PI claims established by Lord Steyn? - Answer ✅>
Greater diagnostic uncertainty
> Floodgates
> Litigation may prolonged recovery
What is a primary victim? - Answer ✅Established in Page v Smith [1996]
> Zone of danger
> Reasonably believes to be in danger
Who can be placed in the zone of danger? - Answer ✅> Anyone who enters such as rescuers
> Can be placed even if D didn't mean to put him there - Donnachie v Chief Constable of Greater
Manchester
@2025 Exam Material 1
, In part 2 of the Page test, what must the fear for own safety be? - Answer ✅> Fear for own
safety must be reasonable - Macfarlane v EE Caledonia
> Assessed objectively, case was rejected as objectovely held not to be in danger
> dont need to be in phsyciaal danger, but can reaosnbly beleive to be
PV and SV can overlap, where is this seen? - Answer ✅> Established that once in the zone of
danger you are a PV regardless of trauma
> Young v Charles Church - the reason for trauma was fear for a friend (who could be held to be
an SV) but was in the zone of danger. Was at risk
What is the shock requirement for PV's, is this generous? - Answer ✅> Sudden shock
> Gradual assaults on the mind - YAH v Medway [2019] from negligent C-section
What is the foreseeability requirement for PV's? - Answer ✅Broad category
Page v Smith [1996]
> The risk of personal injury was reasonably foreseeable
No split between PsI and PiI
> Doesnt necessarily need to be an actual injury, it just needs to be foreseeable
> Even if you suffer physical injury, you can claim psychiatric even if this wasn't foreseeable
> Based on the eggshell skull rule - we find the claimant as you find them
C suffered essentially minor injury but aggravated his previous CFS that became permanent
What are the limits to foreseeability for PV's - Answer ✅> You cannot claim as a PV under Page
lines for fear of injury in the future
> Cant claim for an event that hasn't happened yet
@2025 Exam Material 2
