Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
5 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Wilkinson v Downtown Facts: A jokingly told P her husband had been injured and needed her help. P suffered violent shock to her nervous system and weeks of suffering and incapacity Held: Party may seek recovery for outrageous conduct causing physical harm/mental distress There was little doubt that Downtown's actions would harm P, must be assumed to have been intentional |
Established Wilkinson v Downtown Rule D had "willfully done an act calculated to cause physical harm to the [claimant] - that is to say, infringe her right to personal safety, and thereby in fact caused physical harm to her. That proposition, without more appears to state a good cause of action, there being no justification alleged for act" |
|
|
What is the purpose of Wilkinson v Downtown rule, and how has it evolved? |
Provides a remedy for those who suffer physical or psychiatric injury as a result of another's intentional conduct Refined in Wainright - only recognized psychiatric harm And again in O (A Child) - intentionally hostile |
|
|
Wainwright v Home Office Facts: C & son subject to trip searches in prison. No support for invasive search Held: policy considerations which limit recoverable damage in negligence do not apply equally to torts of intention. No recognizable psychiatric harm, police acted sloppily but in good faith. |
Limits the Rule in Wilkinson "... if it does not provide a remedy for distress which does not amount to recognized psychiatric injury" |
|
|
O (a Child) v Rhodes Facts: O was son of writer who published a documentary with detailed accounts of sexual abuse suffered as a child. Psychologists felt this would have catastrophic effects on child's psyche. Applied for injunction Held: Publishing a book to general public did not fall within scope of tort. Should not extend Wilkinson farther than reasonable
|
Limits of Wilkinson Established 'Conduct element' - needs to be directed towards claimant without justification 'Mental element' - D must intend to cause physical or severe mental/emotional distress 'Consequence element' - physical harm/recognized physiatric illness required |
|
|
What does 'McBride and Bagshaw's Tort Law' suggest in order to establish tort in Wilkinson? |
1. A deliberately does something unjustifiable to B; 2. A's actions cause B to suffer such illness; or 3. At the time A acted: - A intended to cause B to suffer illness; or - A knew that his actions might cause B to suffer such illness; or - It was highly likely that A's actions would cause B to suffer as this illness |
