top of page
CELE SQE1 模拟练习

Examination Timing: 00H00M02S

Greg suffered psychiatric injury after witnessing catastrophic death and destruction on an oil rig. Although he was in no physical danger, he witnessed the events at close range from a support boat and knew that friends and colleagues were perishing before his very eyes. He has been diagnosed as suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) as a result of witnessing the accident and seeks damages. Would Greg be able to sue for his psychiatric illness on the stated facts?

< 上一页

You have chosen the incorrect answer.

下一页 >

Greg’s claim would likely fail because he was a mere bystander. The elements of proximity of relationship, time, and place were not satisfied. In McFarlane v EE Caledonia Ltd [1994] 2 All ER 1, the Court of Appeal held that witnessing the "horrific catastrophe" of the "Piper Alpha" oil rig disaster at close range was not sufficient for a mere bystander to claim for psychiatric injury. The court emphasised that there must be a close relationship with the primary victims and proximity in time and space to the event or its immediate aftermath. 

Key Point: The McFarlane v EE Caledonia Ltd case highlights the strict criteria for bystanders to recover damages for psychiatric injury. The claimant must demonstrate proximity to the event and a close relationship with the primary victims. Without these elements, the courts are reluctant to extend liability to bystanders, even in cases of severe emotional distress.



学习 CELE SQE.png
来自 Lucky Lion 的 CELE SQE PASS 祝福_


bottom of page