Advising on a Secondary Victim Claim? December 2014 Produced a Trio of New Cases Considered by Charles Bagot of Hardwicke
19/01/15. If you are struggling to pin down the relevant principles when advising in a secondary victim case this should be no surprise. As Lord Hoffmann observed: “It seems to me that in this area of the law, the search for principle was called off in Alcock v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1992] 1 A.C. 310. No one can pretend that the existing law, which your Lordships have to accept, is founded upon principle.” in White v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1999] 2 AC 455 (the police officers’ claims arising out of the Hillsborough disaster).
In 2013, the Court of Appeal looked again at secondary victim claims and reiterated that the control mechanisms set out in Alcock should be applied by Judges to limit the ambit of permissible secondary victim claims unless Parliament intervenes to change the law: Lord Dyson MR in Taylor v. Novo (UK) Ltd. [2014] QB 150, [2013] EWCA Civ 194.
December 2014 produced a trio of decisions arising from a variety of tragic circumstances which illustrate the approach the Courts will take in the light of Taylor v. Novo. Firstly, Wild v Southend NHS; secondly, Brock v. Northampton NHS; and thirdly, Berisha v. Stone Superstore...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/nikkormat42
![Appeal judge rules that credit hire company has no costs liability following a finding of fundamental dishonesty in personal injury case: RSA v. Fastrack Solutions Limited [2023] 4 WLUK 92 - David Bowden, Erimus Chambers](/content/images/resized/images/stories/carkeys_72_72.jpg)
