The following PI & Clinical Negligence practice note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:
A primary victim is a claimant who was directly involved as a participant in the incident that caused their psychiatric injury.
Lord Oliver in Alcock v Chief Constable South Yorkshire provided three examples of claimants who he would classify as primary victims:
The claimant was within the actual area of physical danger when the accident occurred or reasonably believed at the time that they were in danger.
The House of Lords in White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police clarified that rescuers are not a special category of primary victim. If the claimant was a rescuer who went to the aid of others involved in an accident, they will only be defined as a primary victim if they were, or reasonably believed themselves to be, in danger. If a rescuer does not meet this test, then they will be classified as a secondary victim and will therefore need to satisfy the control mechanisms before they can recover damages for psychiatric injury.
Lord Oliver in Alcock also suggested primary victims include claimants who involuntarily caused the death or injury of a third party because of the defendant’s negligence or reasonably believed that they had done so. Again, it is doubtful whether this distinct category has survived White. In Hunter v British Coal, the court refused compensation to a claimant who
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
This Practice Note considers proprietary estoppel from a generic standpoint.For industry specific guidance on proprietary estoppel, see Practice Notes:•Estoppel and property law•Mortgages by estoppelProprietary estoppel—what is it?Unlike the other forms of estoppel (see Practice Note: Estoppel—what,
Part 8 of the Corporation Tax Act 2009 (CTA 2009) is a specific corporation tax regime that applies exclusively to the gains and losses of intangible fixed assets. Note, however, that certain intangible fixed assets are excluded from the regime, see Practice Note: Excluded intangible fixed
Having established that a duty of care exists (see Practice Note: Negligence—when does a duty of care arise?), it is then necessary to consider whether or not there has been a breach of that duty. This will depend on a number of factors outlined below and considered against the general background of
STOP PRESS: The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 contains provisions which, on a temporary basis (presently until 31 December 2020) impose significant limitations on the ability for a creditor to seek a winding-up order against a company. For further reading, see Practice Note: Corporate
0330 161 1234
To view our latest legal guidance content,sign-in to Lexis®PSL or register for a free trial.