Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I have a problem question dealing with psychiatric harm. Basically, a cricketer's ball is struck into the road and a car swerves. The driver gets into an accident with a cyclist and then suffers traumatisation but isn't injured. three years ago he suffered from depression due to a friend's death caused by a car accident.

    I need to advise the driver. Do i skip the Caparo test and go straight to whether he is primary or secondary and then apply the criteria from page v smith

    OR

    do i first discuss whether the cricket is liable, owes a duty, etc. then go on to talk about the primary victim?

    I have all the notes and cases i need, it is just the order everything goes in that is confusing me!!!

    Thanks in advance

    p.s. i searched on TSR and although there are similar questions, i still haven't found the answer...maybe it's just me being dumb!!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by princessfiona)
    I have a problem question dealing with psychiatric harm. Basically, a cricketer's ball is struck into the road and a car swerves. The driver gets into an accident with a cyclist and then suffers traumatisation but isn't injured. three years ago he suffered from depression due to a friend's death caused by a car accident.

    I need to advise the driver. Do i skip the Caparo test and go straight to whether he is primary or secondary and then apply the criteria from page v smith

    OR

    do i first discuss whether the cricket is liable, owes a duty, etc. then go on to talk about the primary victim?

    I have all the notes and cases i need, it is just the order everything goes in that is confusing me!!!

    Thanks in advance

    p.s. i searched on TSR and although there are similar questions, i still haven't found the answer...maybe it's just me being dumb!!
    Start with Bolton v Stone. That's the first place to go when figuring out whether the driver has a cause of action against the cricketer. Then you need to consider existing causes of action for psychiatric harm--don't use the Caparo principles where there's already been established a duty of care. If the law isn't clear on whether a duty of care exists, then you proceed incrementally, and the Caparo principles might come into play when determining whether the duty of care ought to be extended. But start with Bolton v Stone.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.