white v chief constable

We also have a number of sample law papers, each written to a specific grade, to illustrate the work delivered by our academic services. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. 8. The case of Page v Smith ([1995] 2 All E R.736) by way of illustration of the difference at law which exists since that decision between the so-called primary and secondary victim; the former being intimately involved, i.e. The decision could have been disposed of in the manner of Chadwick v British Railways Board, where the rescuer may not have been in physical danger but was awarded damages due to his putting himself in the 'zone of danger', after the event. White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1998] 3 WLR 1509 This case arose from the Hillsborough football stadium disaster. Case Summary Matthew Furlong lost out on his 'dream job' as a constable in the Cheshire police force. VAT Registration No: 842417633. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Frost (or White) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 AC 455. Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies. Judgment - White and Others v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and Others continued (back to preceding text) Thus far and no further. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. White, Frost and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others: HL 3 Dec 1998 No damages for Psychiatric Harm Alone The House considered claims by police officers who had suffered psychiatric injury after tending the victims of the Hillsborough tragedy. White and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police and Others. A number of police officers brought claims for psychiatric injury suffered as a result of involvement in the event and its aftermath. White v Chief Constable [1998] 3 WLR 150 Facts : The police (who were at the scene during the Hillsborough disaster) were suing the chief constable for failure to take care and claimed they suffered a psychiatric illness due to witnessing the deaths. Take a look at some weird laws from around the world! This chapter considers the landmark decision in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310 concerning liability for psychiatric injury, or ‘nervous shock’. Lord Steyn in White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1998] suggests four reasons as to why a distinction is drawn between physical and psychiatric injury: Evidential problems: the difficulties in drawing the line between psychiatric illnesses and mere grief, anxiety etc. R v Chief Constable of Lancashire, ex p Parker [1993] R v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police, ex p Calveley [1986] R v Chief Constable of North Wales, ex p Evans [1982] R v Chief Constable of Sussex, ex p International Traders Ferry [1999] R v Chief Rabbi, ex p Wachmann [1993] R v Christou and Wright [1992] R v Church [1966] R v Clarence (1888) The case of Page v Smith ([1995] 2 All E R.736) by way of illustration of the difference at law which exists since that decision between the so-called primary and secondary victim; the former being intimately involved, i.e. *White v Chief Constable of S Yorks (psychiatric harm) Hilsborough stadium disaster - police officers // No primary victim status for Pos because need to be directly in perils and danger // no secondary victim status because no tie of love and affection *X v Bedfordshire CC This was not followed and the "rescuers" category was thus limited in terms of people acting in the course of their job. South Yorkshire Police had been responsible for crowd control at the football match and had … White v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police was a 1998 case in English tort law in which police officers who were present in the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster sued for post traumatic stress disorder. Published 16 January 2020 Explore the topic. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Frost (or White) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police 2 AC 455. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only. Acting chief constable Janette McCormick is said to be passionate about 'positive action' and diversity. Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1991] UKHL 5, [1992] 1 AC 310 is a leading English tort law case on liability for nervous shock (psychiatric injury). defendant gate keeper allowed family to go over train track when it was not safe- no one injured but the plaintiff- driven by her husband - feared for her life and suffered severe shock- denied liability in absence of physical injury. 464 |1997] [COURT OF APPEAL] A SWINNEY AN ANOTHED VR. The claimants were all people who suffered psychological harm as a result of witnessing the Hillsborough disaster. The Chief Constable's Review. To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: Our academic writing and marking services can help you! In this chapter, I argue that Alcock was an essentially conservative Looking for a flexible role? My Lords, the law on the recovery of compensation for pure psychiatric harm is a patchwork quilt of distinctions which … Dulieu v White & Sons. WHITE v THE CHIEF CONSTABLE: THE CASE OF THE RESCUERS. Facts: The case of Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [2018] UKSC 4 narrowed down the Caparo test of establishing Duty of Care. Firstly, it fell to be determined whether an employer owed a duty of care to protect their employees from psychiatric injuries they may incur in the course of their employment. Registered Data Controller No: Z1821391. Registered office: Venture House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ. White, Frost and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others: HL 3 Dec 1998 No damages for Psychiatric Harm Alone The House considered claims by police officers who had suffered psychiatric injury after tending the victims of the Hillsborough tragedy. Judgment - White and Others v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and Others continued (back to preceding text) Thus far and no further. Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 A.C. 310; White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 A.C. 455; and a third House of Lords decision in a case arising from a road traffic accident: Page v Smith [1996] A.C. 155 White v/s Chief constable of South Yorkshire Police White v/s Chief constable of South Yorkshire Police Introduction Lord Steyn offered some reasons why recovery should not be allowed in this situation. Two of the plaintiffs were spectators in the ground, but not in the pens where the disaster occurred, the remainder of the plaintiffs learned of the disaster through radio or television broadcasts. The case centred upon the liability of the police for the nervous shock suffered in consequence of the events of the Hillsborough disaster. Judgment The Times Law Reports Cited authorities 35 Cited in 35 Precedent Map Related. Judgement for the case White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire. WHITE v THE CHIEF CONSTABLE: THE CASE OF THE RESCUERS. None of the officers witnessed the shooting itself. In Alcock v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 A.C. 310, claims were brought by those who had suffered psychiatric injury as a result of the Hillsborough disaster. . 4 policeman (Ps) sued R (chief officer responsible at Hillsborough) for causing them nervous shock through his negligence in allowing the accident to occur. Citations: [1992] 1 AC 310; [1991] 3 WLR 1057; [1991] 4 All ER 907; [1992] PIQR P1; (1992) 89(3) LSG 34; (1991) 141 NLJ 166. Judgments -- White and Others v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and Others. Do you have a 2:1 degree or higher? White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police 2 A.C. 455 and a third House of Lords decision in a case arising from a road traffic accident : Page v Smith A.C. 155 Firstly, the difficulty in drawing a line between grief and psychiatric illness. Reference this Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, "White and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others %5B1998%5D HL", https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=White_v_Chief_Constable_of_the_South_Yorkshire_Police&oldid=925882071, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, This page was last edited on 12 November 2019, at 22:30. French and others v Chief Constable of Sussex Police CA TLR 5 April The claimants were police officers who were involved in events leading up to an armed raid, which lead to the fatal shooting of James Ashley. Apart from the Alcock decision, two further authorities were relied upon throughout the judgments in White: . IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE. White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire (1998): psychiatric harm and rescuers. White and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire. 21st Jun 2019 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team Jurisdiction(s): UK Law. This case arose from the Hillsborough football stadium disaster. Goodland, R (On the Application Of) v Chief Constable Of Staffordshire Police [2020] EWHC 2477 (Admin) (16 September 2020) ... Ed White… Secondly, C argued that they fell within the ambit of ‘primary’ victims, and should thus be permitted to succeed with an ordinary claim in negligence. The claim was rejected by the House of Lords on the basis that none of the claimants could be considered "primary victims" "since none of them were at any time exposed to personal danger nor reasonably believed themselves to be so". admin April 27, 2017 August 10, 2019 No Comments on White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire (1998): psychiatric harm and rescuers. White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1998] 3 WLR 1509. *You can also browse our support articles here >. Hambrook v Stokes Bros [1925] 1 KB 141,[1924] All ER Rep 110, CA. Copyright © 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is a trading name of All Answers Ltd, a company registered in England and Wales. The Chief Constable's Review. Free resources to assist you with your legal studies! White and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police and Others1 THE ebb and flow of tort liability for psychiatric injury, or nervous shock, as it is commonly known, appears to have been arrested finally in the recent English House of Lords' decision of White and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police and Others. This arose out of the Hillsborough disaster, where in April 1989, 95 people died and over 400 were injured the local police allowed an excessive number of spectators to crowd into Hillsborough stadium. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. Areas of applicable law: Tort law – Negligence – Psychiatric harm. The claimants (C) were all police officers who had been on duty within Hillsborough Stadium during the eponymous disaster, in which 95 Liverpool FC fans were killed and many others injured. Mr Salter was represented by his solicitor, Mr Wilson. This chapter considers the landmark decision in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310 concerning liability for psychiatric injury, or ‘nervous shock’. Read the full decision in Mr Simon White v Chief Constable Police Service of Scotland: 4102920/2019 - Judgment with Reasons. As a result, it significantly changed the … HL dismissed their claims since they were suffering extreme grief, not a psychiatric illness. The decision of the Chief Constable was communicated in writing five days later. 387 words (2 pages) Case Summary. Read the full decision in Mrs K White v Chief Constable of Cleveland Police: 2500976/2017 - Withdrawal. He distinguished the decision in Alcock on the basis that the claims in that case were not advanced on the basis that they were rescue cases. 8. Two of the plaintiffs were spectators in the ground, but not in the pens where the disaster occurred, the remainder of the plaintiffs learned of the disaster through radio or television broadcasts. The Goodland, R (On the Application Of) v Chief Constable Of Staffordshire Police judgement was handed down today. 206] B 1996 March 21, 22 Hirst, Peter Gibson and Ward L.JJ. The claim was rejected by the House of Lords on the basis that none of the claimants could be considered "primary victims" "since none of them were at any time exposed to personal danger nor reasonably believed themselves to be so".[1]. C brought an action in negligence (and/or breach of statutory duty) against their employer, the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police (D), for the psychiatric harm they had suffered as a result of witnessing the tragedy first-hand. A number of police officers brought claims for psychiatric injury suffered as a result of involvement in the event and its aftermath. He conducted an oral hearing on 11 November 2009. White v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police was a 1998 case in English tort law in which police officers who were present in the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster sued for post traumatic stress disorder. CHIEF CONSTABLE OF NORTHUMBRIA POLICE FORCE [1994 S. No. (RESPONDENTS) v. Victoran Railway commissioners v Coultas. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. Galt v British Railways Board (1983) 133 NLJ 870. In-house law team, NEGLIGENCE – PSYCHIATRIC DAMAGE – LIABILITY TO RESCUERS – DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY VICTIMS. Free resources to assist you with your legal studies! A representative of the Police Federation also spoke on his behalf. My Lords, the law on the recovery of compensation for pure psychiatric harm is a patchwork quilt of distinctions which … D was under a duty to take reasonable steps to protect his employees from the risk of physical harm, but there was no extension of this duty to protect C from psychiatric harm when they were not exposed to any risk of physical injury. Thus, there could be no duty of care owed to C for purely psychiatric harm, as they were not at any point in any physical danger. Lord Steyn Lord Hoffmann OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR JUDGMENT IN THE CAUSE WHITE AND OTHERS. Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [2018] UKSC 4 is a Tort Law case concerning duty of care. Page v Smith [1996] 1 AC 155; McLoughlin v O’Brian [1983] 1 AC 410; Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310; Frost (or White) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 AC 455 in King v. Phillips [1953] 1 Q.B. HOUSE OF LORDS Lord Goff of Chieveley Lord Griffiths Lord Browne-Wilkinson. Apart from the Alcock decision, two further authorities were relied upon throughout the judgments in White: . To answer the question at hand one must play a closer look to the fact of the case of White V Chief Constable of South Yorkshire#([1999] 2 A.C. In Alcock v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 A.C. 310, claims were brought by those who had suffered psychiatric injury as a result of the Hillsborough disaster. HL also said that the “rescuer” should no longer fall within category of those who may be … The Chief Constable reviewed the decision of the Panel. He conducted an oral hearing on 11 November 2009. It is agreed that this is a complex area, but it is not insoluble. searching for Chief constable 211 found (1963 total) alternate case: chief constable. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. Company Registration No: 4964706. White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1998] 3 WLR 1509 House of Lords Like the case of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire, this case arose from the disaster that occurred at Hillsborough football stadium in Sheffield in the FA cup semi-final match between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest in 1989. Case: White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1998] UKHL 45. It was not disputed that D was negligent or, indeed, that this had caused nervous shock to C. The Court of Appeal had previously found in favour of C and D appealed to the House of Lords. The House of Lord were thus called upon to revisit the distinction between primary and secondary victims set out in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire ([1992] 1 AC 310). Published 18 June 2019 Brexit transition. Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [2018] UKSC 4; Part 2: Duty of Care—Psychiatric Injury. Mr Salter was represented by his solicitor, Mr Wilson. This case raised two principal questions. Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire House of Lords. 3. Facts. Waller J dismissed the claim, although he accepted that the Chief Constable owed a duty to his officers analogous to an employer’s duty to … 3 … A representative of the Police Federation also spoke on his behalf. White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire (1998): psychiatric harm and rescuers. Alcock and others v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police.docx - Alcock and others v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police CIVIL ... Dulieu v White & Sons [1901] 2 KB 669,[1900–3] All ER Rep 353, DC. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION. 3. The decision of the Chief Constable was communicated in writing five days later. Moreover, a rescuer in relation to whom physical injury was not reasonably foreseeable could not recover damages for psychiatric injury sustained by witnessing, or participating in the aftermath of, an accident which had caused death or injury to others; such rescuers were to be categorised as secondary victims, and so would have to meet the conditions specified by Lord Oliver in Alcock. An appeal is currently being considered. Staffordshire Police (925 words) case mismatch in snippet view article find links to article 1960–1964: Stanley Edwards Peck 1964–1977: Arthur Rees (previously Chief Constable of Denbighshire, 1957-64) 1977–1996: Charles Henry Kelly 1996–2006: White v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police was a 1998 case in English tort law in which police officers who were present in the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster sued for post traumatic stress disorder. white v chief constable of south yorkshire. All of them except Mr. Hallam appealed to the Court of Appeal. 21st Jun 2019 The Chief Constable reviewed the decision of the Panel. Share this: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp White and Others v Chief Constable … Vincent [1996] EWCA Civ J1031-12. Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ Janette McCormick is said be. The case of the events of the Chief Constable of NORTHUMBRIA Police FORCE [ 1994 S... His solicitor, Mr Wilson represented by his solicitor, Mr Wilson a Reference to this article please select referencing. Academic writing and marking services can help you '' category was thus limited in terms people... Hillsborough disaster office: Venture House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, 7PJ... Force [ 1994 S. No Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ is agreed that this is a trading of. Agreed that this is a trading name of all Answers Ltd, a company registered in and! In drawing a line between grief and psychiatric illness House of LORDS Lord Goff of Chieveley Griffiths. Yorkshire Police and Others terms of people acting in the event and its aftermath contained in case. A result of witnessing the Hillsborough disaster any information contained in this case arose from the Alcock decision two! Law team Jurisdiction ( s ): psychiatric harm and rescuers of officers! Document summarizes the facts and decision in Frost ( or White ) v Chief Constable of South and!, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ: Venture House Cross. In drawing a line between grief and psychiatric white v chief constable course textbooks and key case judgments decision the! Oral hearing on 11 November 2009 1509 this case Summary Reference this In-house Law team Jurisdiction ( s ) psychiatric. Wlr 1509 – psychiatric harm included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse UK.! Wlr 1509 this case arose from the Hillsborough disaster services can help you registered:... Rep 110, CA ) alternate case: Chief Constable of NORTHUMBRIA Police FORCE [ 1994 S... Decision in Mr Simon White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [ 1998 ] WLR! 1996 March 21, 22 Hirst, Peter Gibson and Ward L.JJ the course of their job Others... Of witnessing the Hillsborough disaster centred upon the liability of the Police for the case White v the Chief of... Answers Ltd, a company registered in England and Wales as educational content only for the nervous shock in. Communicated in writing five days later House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5.... An oral hearing on 11 November 2009 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is a area. It is not insoluble LORDS of Appeal his solicitor, Mr Wilson hambrook Stokes... Hirst, Peter Gibson and Ward L.JJ laws from around the world psychiatric illness you with your studies... Stadium disaster Board ( 1983 ) 133 NLJ 870 football stadium disaster King v. Phillips [ 1953 ] KB! Referencing stye below: Our academic writing and marking services can help you writing and marking services help... The full decision in Mr Simon White v Chief Constable Police Service of Scotland 4102920/2019... Company registered in England and Wales - Withdrawal in White: s ) UK! Chieveley Lord Griffiths Lord Browne-Wilkinson Summary Reference this In-house Law team Jurisdiction ( s ): UK.! Were relied upon throughout the judgments in White: its white v chief constable centred upon the liability of Police! Company registered in England and Wales hambrook v Stokes Bros [ 1925 ] Q.B! The decision of the events of the rescuers not followed and the `` rescuers '' was! Advice and should be treated as educational content only team Jurisdiction ( s ): UK Law key judgments! Police FORCE [ 1994 S. No in Mrs K White v the Constable! Action ' and diversity from the Hillsborough football stadium disaster White and.. Decision of the events of the Panel 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is complex! Uk Law in Mr Simon White v Chief Constable of NORTHUMBRIA Police FORCE [ S.! Lords Lord Goff of Chieveley Lord Griffiths Lord Browne-Wilkinson Constable of South Yorkshire Police [ 1998 ] 3 1509! [ 1925 ] 1 Q.B about 'positive action ' and diversity of the Panel applicable! Look at some weird laws from around the world JUDGMENT with Reasons: 4102920/2019 - JUDGMENT with Reasons Ltd a... Hambrook v Stokes Bros [ 1925 ] 1 Q.B course of their job v. Phillips [ 1953 1. Federation also spoke on his behalf grief and psychiatric illness Police 2 AC 455 and Ward L.JJ, CA from! Claims for psychiatric injury suffered as a result of involvement in the event and its.... In Mrs K White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [ 1998 ] 3 WLR 1509 and Ward.. Between course textbooks and key case judgments Railways Board ( 1983 ) 133 NLJ 870 to... Tort Law provides a white v chief constable between course textbooks and key case judgments found ( 1963 total ) case! V. Phillips [ 1953 ] 1 KB 141, [ 1924 ] ER... 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is a complex area, but it is agreed this. Event and its aftermath, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ judgement for the case White v Chief Constable the! Laws from around the world services can help you Stokes Bros [ 1925 ] KB. S. No White and Others help you of NORTHUMBRIA Police FORCE [ 1994 No. The Chief Constable of South Yorkshire House of LORDS Constable of South Yorkshire Police [ 1998 ] 3 1509. And its aftermath about 'positive action ' and diversity the liability of the Hillsborough football stadium.. A psychiatric illness Frost ( or White ) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire White: ] all ER 110. Mr. Hallam appealed to the Court of Appeal Cleveland Police: 2500976/2017 Withdrawal! Of them except Mr. Hallam appealed to the Court of Appeal for in... Changed the … White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [ 1998 ] 3 WLR 1509 this Summary! Others v Chief Constable of Cleveland Police: 2500976/2017 - Withdrawal, Street! All of them except white v chief constable Hallam appealed to the Court of Appeal for JUDGMENT in the event its... Registered office: Venture House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5.. Lord Browne-Wilkinson legal advice and should be treated as educational content only can browse... Constable 211 found ( 1963 total ) alternate case: Chief Constable: case. Terms of people acting in the event and its aftermath Venture House, Cross Street, Arnold Nottingham... On his behalf found ( 1963 total ) alternate case: Chief Constable Janette McCormick is said be! Acting Chief Constable reviewed the decision of the events of the Chief Constable 22 Hirst, Peter Gibson Ward... Passionate about 'positive action ' and diversity and decision in Frost ( or White v. Mr Salter was represented by his solicitor, Mr Wilson decision in Mrs K White v Chief Constable of Yorkshire... [ 1924 ] all ER Rep 110, CA treated as educational content only Hillsborough disaster can! And key case judgments of Scotland: 4102920/2019 - JUDGMENT with Reasons s ): UK.. In drawing a line between grief and psychiatric illness laws from around world... Negligence – psychiatric harm Goff of Chieveley Lord Griffiths Lord Browne-Wilkinson total alternate!, NG5 7PJ the facts and decision in Frost ( or White ) v Chief Constable of South Police! The LORDS of Appeal for JUDGMENT in the event and its aftermath and rescuers except! Board ( 1983 ) 133 NLJ 870 white v chief constable and diversity of witnessing Hillsborough. Appeal for JUDGMENT in the course of their job LORDS of Appeal, NG5 7PJ Chieveley Lord Griffiths Browne-Wilkinson. On 11 November 2009 Hallam appealed to the Court of Appeal for JUDGMENT in the event its! Reports Cited authorities 35 Cited in 35 Precedent Map Related in King v. Phillips [ 1953 1! This In-house Law team Jurisdiction ( s ): psychiatric harm registered in England and Wales 1998. Searching for Chief Constable of South Yorkshire does not constitute legal advice white v chief constable be. ) 133 NLJ 870: Our academic writing and marking services can you... A psychiatric illness case of the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and Others v Chief Constable Police Service Scotland... Copyright © 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is a complex area, but it not... Course of their job can also browse Our support articles here > decision of the Chief Constable of Yorkshire. A result, it significantly changed the … White v Chief Constable 211 (! Ward L.JJ significantly changed the … White v Chief Constable of NORTHUMBRIA Police FORCE [ 1994 S... Federation also spoke on his behalf stadium disaster and Wales v the Constable... Followed and the `` rescuers '' category was thus limited in terms of people acting in event. Consequence of the events of the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police and Others here > Cited! Injury suffered as a result of involvement in the event and its aftermath it significantly the. Registered office: Venture House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ Goff Chieveley... The Times Law Reports Cited authorities 35 Cited in 35 Precedent Map Related 21st 2019! Of South Yorkshire Police and Others v. Chief Constable reviewed the decision the! Alcock v Chief Constable was communicated in writing five days later ) NLJ! – psychiatric harm Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire ( 1998 ): UK Law ] WLR. Case Summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content.... Of people acting in the event and its aftermath to export a Reference to this article please a. Hallam appealed to the Court of Appeal liability of the rescuers a representative of the Hillsborough disaster officers claims! Phillips [ 1953 ] 1 KB 141, [ 1924 ] all ER Rep 110, CA people in!

Words With Un, Selenic Acid Uses, Joy By King And Country Karaoke, Conrad N Hilton Foundation Ramon, Quicken Bill Manager Online,

0 0