Kelly v. Hennessy [1995] IESC 8; [1995] 3 IR 253; [1996] 1 ILRM 321 (28th November, 1995)

Kelly v. Hennessy [1995] IESC 8; [1995] 3 IR 253; [1996] 1 ILRM 321 (28th November, 1995)

A secondary victim who suffers a recognisable psychiatric illness as a result of shock from learning of and witnessing the immediate aftermath of an accident caused by the defendant's negligence, and who is in a close relationship with the primary victims, is entitled to recover damages, provided the illness is proximate in time, space, and relationship. The plaintiff in this case satisfied these criteria, and there was credible evidence supporting the findings of the trial judge. The award for future damages was reduced due to the likelihood of partial recovery.

Citation
[1996] 1 ILRM 321
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Anne Kelly; Defendant/appellant: Fergus Hennessy
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in part, allowed in part (damages for future loss reduced)
Legal Topics
Nervous Shock, Negligence, Duty of Care, Psychiatric Injury, Damages, Mitigation of Loss
Tort Law Nervous Shock Negligence Duty of Care Psychiatric Injury Damages Mitigation of Loss

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anne Kelly

Plaintiff/respondent

Fergus Hennessy

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a secondary victim can recover damages for nervous shock resulting from witnessing the aftermath of an accident caused by the defendant's negligence
  2. 2 Whether the psychiatric illness suffered by the plaintiff was sufficiently proximate in time, space, and relationship to the accident
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff failed to mitigate her damages by not seeking treatment

Ratio Decidendi

A secondary victim who suffers a recognisable psychiatric illness as a result of shock from learning of and witnessing the immediate aftermath of an accident caused by the defendant's negligence, and who is in a close relationship with the primary victims, is entitled to recover damages, provided the illness is proximate in time, space, and relationship. The plaintiff in this case satisfied these criteria, and there was credible evidence supporting the findings of the trial judge. The award for future damages was reduced due to the likelihood of partial recovery.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in part, allowed in part (damages for future loss reduced)

Orders

  • Damages for past pain and suffering affirmed at £35,000
  • Damages for future pain and suffering reduced from £40,000 to £20,000