| Citation | |
| Keywords | |
| Facts | |
| Issues | |
| Contentions | |
| Law Points | |
| Judgment | |
| Ratio Decidendi & Case Authority |
Full Case Details
Facts
- Alcock concerned psychiatric harm caused by the Hillsborough disaster of 1989. This occurred at the Hillsborough Football Stadium, Sheffield during the FA Cup Semi−Final in which 96 spectators were killed and 450 injured in a human crush. The disaster was broadcast live on television and radio.
- Despite considerable public controversy, South Yorkshire Police had admitted liability in negligence for the deaths, having allowed too many supporters into the stadium.
- In the Alcock case, 10 relatives of the deceased brought negligence claims in tort for psychiatric harm or nervous shock. Of the claimants, most had not been present in the stadium at the time of the disaster and none had been in physical risk. Most had sustained psychiatric injuries after learning of the events by television or radio.
Principles
- Three elements inherent in any claim (Nervous Shock)
- The class of persons whose claims should be recognized
- The proximity of such persons to the accident
- The means by which the shock is caused
- Mostly Secondary victims – House of Lords rejected the claim
- Shock must be a “sudden” and not a “gradual” assaualt
- Sufficiently proximate relationship to the death or injured person. – “Close tie of love and affection”
- Presumed to exist in − Parents and children − spouses − Fiances
- In sibling − ties of love & affection must proved
- Must be reasonably foreseeable that a person of ” normal fortitude” in claimant’s position would suffer psychiatric damage .
- The decision in this case was influenced by greater social concern of allowing a flood of claims – which judicial system would not be able to cope.
Shock must be cause by unaided senses
