header-logo header-logo

More than a bystander?

17 July 2015 / Ruth Hewitt
Issue: 7661 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail
nlj_7661_hewitt

Ruth Hewitt provides an update on how & when secondary victims can run successful compensation claims

“Secondary victims” are those people who are not at risk of physical injury because of the defendant’s negligence, but do suffer a psychiatric injury as a result of witnessing the injury of a loved one. Alcock & others v The Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police (1992) AC 310 is the leading case, arising out of the Hillsborough disaster. This case set out what a claimant must prove to recover compensation as a secondary victim:

  • A close tie of love and affection with the primary victim;
  • close proximity to the incident in time and place;
  • perception of the event or its aftermath; and
  • that the psychiatric illness that had been followed had been induced by the event.

When judgment was delivered in Alcock , it was only the third time that “nervous shock” had been considered by the House of Lords. It was acknowledged that this was because the number of cases brought by secondary

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll