Hartman v South Essex Mental Health & Community Care NHS Trust

Hartman v South Essex Mental Health & Community Care NHS Trust

Claims for psychiatric injury due to workplace stress require proof that the injury was reasonably foreseeable to the employer, based on what was known or ought to have been known about the employee’s vulnerability or the nature of the work. Employers are not liable unless there are clear indications of impending harm and they fail to take reasonable steps. Where psychiatric injury is caused by specific traumatic incidents and the employer has foreseen such risk and implemented (or failed to implement) adequate procedures, liability may arise. Damages must be apportioned if non-negligent factors contributed, unless the harm is indivisible.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Hartman; Defendant/appellant: South Essex Mental Health and Community Care NHS Trust; Claimant/respondent: Best; Defendant/appellant: Staffordshire University; Claimant/respondent: Wheeldon; Defendant/appellant: HSBC Bank Ltd; Claimant/appellant: Green; Defendant/respondent: Grimsby & Scunthorpe Newspapers Ltd; Claimant/respondent: Moore; Defendant/appellant: Welwyn Components Ltd; Claimant/respondent: Melville; Defendant/appellant: The Home Office
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 January 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeals by employers in Hartman, Best, and Green allowed (claims dismissed); appeals by employers in Wheeldon, Moore, and Melville dismissed (claims succeed).
Legal Topics
Employer's Liability, Psychiatric Injury, Negligence, Workplace Stress, Damages, Foreseeability, Causation, Breach of Duty
Tort Law Employment Law Employer's Liability Psychiatric Injury Negligence Workplace Stress Damages Foreseeability +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hartman

Claimant/respondent

South Essex Mental Health and Community Care NHS Trust

Defendant/appellant

Best

Claimant/respondent

Staffordshire University

Defendant/appellant

Wheeldon

Claimant/respondent

HSBC Bank Ltd

Defendant/appellant

Green

Claimant/appellant

Grimsby & Scunthorpe Newspapers Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Moore

Claimant/respondent

Welwyn Components Ltd

Defendant/appellant

Melville

Claimant/respondent

The Home Office

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether psychiatric injury caused by workplace stress is actionable in negligence against employers
  2. 2 What constitutes reasonable foreseeability of psychiatric injury in the workplace
  3. 3 What steps must employers take to discharge their duty of care regarding workplace stress

Ratio Decidendi

Claims for psychiatric injury due to workplace stress require proof that the injury was reasonably foreseeable to the employer, based on what was known or ought to have been known about the employee’s vulnerability or the nature of the work. Employers are not liable unless there are clear indications of impending harm and they fail to take reasonable steps. Where psychiatric injury is caused by specific traumatic incidents and the employer has foreseen such risk and implemented (or failed to implement) adequate procedures, liability may arise. Damages must be apportioned if non-negligent factors contributed, unless the harm is indivisible.

Court Disposition

Appeals by employers in Hartman, Best, and Green allowed (claims dismissed); appeals by employers in Wheeldon, Moore, and Melville dismissed (claims succeed).

Orders

  • Judgments in favour of Hartman and Best set aside; claims dismissed.
  • Judgment for Wheeldon against HSBC Bank Ltd upheld; damages awarded.