Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust

• Published date: 16 January 2024
• Subject Matter: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Trials & Appeals & Compensation, Personal Injury, Professional Negligence
• Law Firm: Ellisons Legal
• Author: Ellisons Legal

A recent decision in the Supreme Court restricts 'secondary victim' claims to those who witness an accident or serious injury but removes the requirements that a Claimant must witness a "sudden shock to the nervous system, caused by a "horrifying event".

Where claims from 'secondary victims' (relatives who either witness a loved one being seriously injured in a horrific accident or the aftermath following such an event) are concerned, the law has always been controversial.

Lord Oliver in the previously decided case of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992], identified factors which he opined must apply in secondary victim cases to allow recovery by the Claimant. These have come to be known as the 'control mechanisms' imposed by the common law to define the limits of liability in such cases. In summary, to succeed a secondary victim must establish:

1. The close ties of love and affection between them and the primary victim
2. That their injury arose from a sudden and unexpected shock
3. That they were personally present at the scene or immediate aftermath
4. That their injury arose from witnessing the death, extreme danger to, or injury of the primary victim
5. That there must be "a close temporal connection between the event and the [secondary victim's] perception of it".

In a Judgment published on 11^th January 2024, the Supreme Court has now dismissed the appeal of the Claimants in the case of Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2024] UKSC 1 and the cases of Polmear v Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust and Purchase v Ahmed. This binding decision brings an end to decades of debate as to whether a person who witnesses the death or serious injury of a loved one (e.g. close relatives) due to medical negligence, can bring a claim as a secondary victim. This Judgment concludes that a Claimant in this position cannot bring a secondary victim claim and that the earlier case of North Glamorgan NHS Trust v Walters (2002) EWCA Civ 1792, [2003] PIQR P16 ("Walters") was wrongly decided.

The Facts

The Claimants in these recently decided cases were relatives of individuals who died several months after a medical professional had misdiagnosed them. In the Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2024] case, Mr Paul suffered a heart attack and collapsed when out shopping with his daughters (the Claimants). The Claimants' case was that the Defendant Hospital was negligent in failing to perform a coronary angiography back in November 2012, which would have revealed...