Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police Case Summary 1992

Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police Case Summary 1992

Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police case involved NEGLIGENCE – NERVOUS SHOCK – TRAUMATIC EVENT WITNESSED INDIRECTLY – DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY VICTIMS

Facts:

  • A joint action was brought by Alcock (C) and several other claimants against the head of the South Yorkshire Police. C and the other claimants all had relatives who were caught up in the Hillsborough Stadium disaster, in which 95 fans of Liverpool FC died in a crush due, it was later established, to the negligence of the police in permitting too many supporters to crowd in one part of the stadium.
  • The disaster was broadcast on live television, where several claimants alleged they had witnessed friends and relatives die. Others were present in the stadium or had heard about the events in other ways. All claimed damages for the psychiatric harm they suffered as a result.

Contention & Issue:

The House of Lords was called upon to determine whether, for the purposes of establishing liability in negligence, those who suffer purely psychiatric harm from witnessing an event at which they are not physically present are sufficiently proximate to a duty to be owed, and thus can be said to be reasonably within the contemplation of the tortfeasor?

Ratio & Decision:

The House of Lords, in finding for D, held that, in cases of purely psychiatric damage caused by negligence, a distinction must be drawn between ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ victims.

A primary victim was one who was present at the event as a participant, and would thus be owed a duty-of-care by D, subject to harm caused by being foreseeable, of course. A secondary victim, by contrast, would only succeed if they fell within certain criteria. Such persons must establish:

  • A close tie of love and affection to a primary victim
  • Knowledge of the event with their own unaided senses
  • Proximity to the event or its immediate aftermath
  • A sufficiently shocking event must cause the psychiatric harm

Neither C nor the other claimants could meet these conditions, therefore the appeal was dismissed.

Found Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police case summary useful? We have a bunch of useful topics from the law of tort which will help you in your preparation here >>> LAW OF TORT

Check out our YouTube Channel for free legal videos >>> LAW PLANET YT

Share on print
Print PDF
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on email
Email
Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Om Ram

Om Ram

Om Ram is currently a 2nd-year LL.B. student at Campus Law Centre, Delhi University. Previously he did Life Sciences from SVC, Delhi University. He shows his life journey by making Legal Vlogs on a YouTube channel named 'Om Ram'. He has interests in Law, Science & Film making. Some of his notable work related to photography and other interests can be seen on his Instagram. He also has a channel named 'Law Planet' where he along with his sister makes videos to make people aware of laws and their rights.
See Legal News, Judgements, Jobs Monthwise

Recent Posts

About Us

Law Planet is specially created for law enthusiasts. We provide courses for various law exams. We also write about law to increase legal awareness amongst common citizens.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR BLOG!