Novel duty situations — practice questions

Issue: Duty for secondary victim psychiatric harm — facts echo Alcock v CC South Yorkshire [1992] (Hillsborough).

Classification: Husband = secondary victim (not within zone of danger himself). Apply Alcock controls:

1. Close tie of love and affection: Presumed between spouses — satisfied.
2. Proximity in time and space: Must perceive event or immediate aftermath with own senses.
   • Alcock: Identifying bodies in morgue hours later = too remote.
   • Live TV: Generally not equivalent to being present — lacks direct perception; broadcast may show distressing images but fails immediacy and direct perception tests (Alcock, McLoughlin v O'Brian limits).
3. Sudden shock: Psychiatric injury from sudden horrific event, not gradual grief (Alcock — nervous shock requirement).

Primary victim alternative? If husband were not present and only watched TV, Page v Smith primary route fails — no involvement in accident.

Conclusion: On Alcock principles, husband likely no duty — televised viewing insufficient for secondary victim claim. Contrast McLoughlin v O'Brian — mother at hospital shortly after accident: immediate aftermath, direct perception, close tie — duty found.

Issue: The issue is the recoverability of different types of economic loss caused by a negligent act. This requires distinguishing between physical damage, consequential economic loss, and pure economic loss. The key authority is Spartan Steel & Alloys v Martin & Co.

Step 1: Identify Physical Damage. The molten metal that solidified and was ruined constitutes physical damage to the claimant's property. The value of this metal is £5,000. This is recoverable.

Step 2: Identify Consequential Economic Loss. The lost profit of £2,000 on the ruined metal is a direct consequence of the physical damage. This is consequential economic loss and is therefore recoverable.

Step 3: Identify Pure Economic Loss. The lost profit of £8,000 from the four batches that could not be processed during the outage is not a result of physical damage to the claimant's property. It is a 'pure' economic loss resulting solely from the interruption of business activity. Following the precedent in Spartan Steel, this type of loss is not recoverable due to policy reasons (avoiding opening the 'floodgates' to indeterminate claims).

Step 4: Calculate Total Recoverable Damages.

• Physical Damage: £5,000
• Consequential Economic Loss: £2,000
• Pure Economic Loss: £0 (not recoverable)

Total Recoverable Amount = £5,000 + £2,000 = £7,000.

Conclusion: Steelworks plc can recover £7,000 from Diggers Ltd, representing the physical damage and the consequential economic loss. The £8,000 in pure economic loss is not recoverable.