Paul & Ors v The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2022] EWCA Civ 12 (13 January 2022)

Paul & Ors v The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2022] EWCA Civ 12 (13 January 2022)

The Court of Appeal held that, following binding authority in Novo, secondary victims cannot recover damages for psychiatric injury where the horrific event (such as death or collapse) is separated in time from the negligent act or omission and any actionable damage to the primary victim. The five elements of proximity apply equally to clinical negligence as to accident cases, but the law as it stands does not permit recovery for psychiatric injury caused by witnessing a separate event removed in time from the original negligence. Any change to this position must be made by the Supreme Court or Parliament.

Citation
[2022] EWCA Civ 12
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Saffron Paul; Claimant/respondent: Mya Paul (a child by her mother and litigation friend Balbir Kaur Paul); Defendant/appellant: The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust; Claimant/respondent: Lynette Polmear; Claimant/respondent: Mark Polmear; Defendant/appellant: Royal Cornwall Hospital NHS Trust; Claimant/appellant: Tara Purchase; Defendant/respondent: Mahmud Ahmed
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal (consolidated Clinical Negligence Claims) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeals allowed in favour of the defendants/appellants; claims by secondary victims struck out.
Legal Topics
Psychiatric Injury, Secondary Victims, Proximity, Control Mechanisms, Clinical Negligence
Tort Law Medical Negligence Psychiatric Injury Secondary Victims Proximity Control Mechanisms Clinical Negligence

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Saffron Paul

Claimant/respondent

Mya Paul (a child by her mother and litigation friend Balbir Kaur Paul)

Claimant/respondent

The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust

Defendant/appellant

Lynette Polmear

Claimant/respondent

Mark Polmear

Claimant/respondent

Royal Cornwall Hospital NHS Trust

Defendant/appellant

Tara Purchase

Claimant/appellant

Mahmud Ahmed

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (consolidated Clinical Negligence Claims) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether secondary victims can recover damages for psychiatric injury caused by witnessing the death or injury of a close relative resulting from clinical negligence, where the horrific event is separated in time from the negligent act or omission.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that, following binding authority in Novo, secondary victims cannot recover damages for psychiatric injury where the horrific event (such as death or collapse) is separated in time from the negligent act or omission and any actionable damage to the primary victim. The five elements of proximity apply equally to clinical negligence as to accident cases, but the law as it stands does not permit recovery for psychiatric injury caused by witnessing a separate event removed in time from the original negligence. Any change to this position must be made by the Supreme Court or Parliament.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in favour of the defendants/appellants; claims by secondary victims struck out.

Orders

  • Claims by secondary victims in Paul, Polmear, and Purchase struck out as disclosing no reasonable cause of action under current law.
  • Permission to appeal to the Supreme Court granted.