header-logo header-logo

Personal injury

11 September 2008
Issue: 7336 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Monk v PC Harrington Ltd [2008] EWHC 1879, [2008] All ER (D) 20 (Aug)

(i) In order to recover damages for psychiatric injury as a rescuer, it is necessary for the claimant to show that his involvement in the aftermath of the accident was such that he can fairly be described as a rescuer (and so trivial or peripheral assistance will not suffice) and that, in going to the rescue of the injured people, he objectively exposed himself to danger or reasonably believed that he was doing so.

(ii) In order to recover damages for psychiatric injury as an “unwilling participant”, the claimant’s injury must be caused by a genuine and reasonable belief that he has caused the death or injury of another.

Issue: 7336 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

London promotion underscores firm’s investment in white collar and investigations

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Private client team strengthened by partner appointment

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

Kate Gaskell, CEO of Flex Legal, reflects on chasing her childhood dreams underscores the importance of welcoming those from all backgrounds into the profession

NEWS
Overcrowded prisons, mental health hospitals and immigration centres are failing to meet international and domestic human rights standards, the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) has warned
Two speedier and more streamlined qualification routes have been launched for probate and conveyancing professionals
Workplace stress was a contributing factor in almost one in eight cases before the employment tribunal last year, indicating its endemic grip on the UK workplace
In Ward v Rai, the High Court reaffirmed that imprecise points of dispute can and will be struck out. Writing in NLJ this week, Amy Dunkley of Bolt Burdon Kemp reports on the decision and its implications for practitioners
Could the Supreme Court’s ruling in R v Hayes; R v Palombo unintentionally unsettle future complex fraud trials? Maia Cohen-Lask of Corker Binning explores the question in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll