White v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police was a 1998 case in English tort law in which police officers who were present in the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster sued for post traumatic stress disorder. This case raised two principal questions. The Chief Constable reviewed the decision of the Panel. The House of Lord were thus called upon to revisit the distinction between primary and secondary victims set out in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire ([1992] 1 AC 310). VAT Registration No: 842417633. Judgement for the case White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire. Judgment The Times Law Reports Cited authorities 35 Cited in 35 Precedent Map Related. Thus, there could be no duty of care owed to C for purely psychiatric harm, as they were not at any point in any physical danger. Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies. white v chief constable of south yorkshire. All of them except Mr. Hallam appealed to the Court of Appeal. Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, "White and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others %5B1998%5D HL", https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=White_v_Chief_Constable_of_the_South_Yorkshire_Police&oldid=925882071, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, This page was last edited on 12 November 2019, at 22:30. White, Frost and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others: HL 3 Dec 1998 No damages for Psychiatric Harm Alone The House considered claims by police officers who had suffered psychiatric injury after tending the victims of the Hillsborough tragedy. Registered office: Venture House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ. White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1998] 3 WLR 1509. This chapter considers the landmark decision in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310 concerning liability for psychiatric injury, or ‘nervous shock’. The Chief Constable's Review. We also have a number of sample law papers, each written to a specific grade, to illustrate the work delivered by our academic services. It was not disputed that D was negligent or, indeed, that this had caused nervous shock to C. The Court of Appeal had previously found in favour of C and D appealed to the House of Lords. Lord Steyn in White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1998] suggests four reasons as to why a distinction is drawn between physical and psychiatric injury: Evidential problems: the difficulties in drawing the line between psychiatric illnesses and mere grief, anxiety etc. Free resources to assist you with your legal studies! The claim was rejected by the House of Lords on the basis that none of the claimants could be considered "primary victims" "since none of them were at any time exposed to personal danger nor reasonably believed themselves to be so". White v/s Chief constable of South Yorkshire Police White v/s Chief constable of South Yorkshire Police Introduction Lord Steyn offered some reasons why recovery should not be allowed in this situation. To answer the question at hand one must play a closer look to the fact of the case of White V Chief Constable of South Yorkshire#([1999] 2 A.C. Judgment - White and Others v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and Others continued (back to preceding text) Thus far and no further. 8. 21st Jun 2019 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team Jurisdiction(s): UK Law. 21st Jun 2019 In-house law team, NEGLIGENCE – PSYCHIATRIC DAMAGE – LIABILITY TO RESCUERS – DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY VICTIMS. A number of police officers brought claims for psychiatric injury suffered as a result of involvement in the event and its aftermath. As a result, it significantly changed the … He conducted an oral hearing on 11 November 2009. Vincent [1996] EWCA Civ J1031-12. This was not followed and the "rescuers" category was thus limited in terms of people acting in the course of their job. Published 18 June 2019 Brexit transition. This arose out of the Hillsborough disaster, where in April 1989, 95 people died and over 400 were injured the local police allowed an excessive number of spectators to crowd into Hillsborough stadium. The Chief Constable reviewed the decision of the Panel. South Yorkshire Police had been responsible for crowd control at the football match and had … White and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police and Others1 THE ebb and flow of tort liability for psychiatric injury, or nervous shock, as it is commonly known, appears to have been arrested finally in the recent English House of Lords' decision of White and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police and Others. Goodland, R (On the Application Of) v Chief Constable Of Staffordshire Police [2020] EWHC 2477 (Admin) (16 September 2020) ... Ed White… This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Frost (or White) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police 2 AC 455. Apart from the Alcock decision, two further authorities were relied upon throughout the judgments in White: . My Lords, the law on the recovery of compensation for pure psychiatric harm is a patchwork quilt of distinctions which … White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police 2 A.C. 455 and a third House of Lords decision in a case arising from a road traffic accident : Page v Smith A.C. 155 Facts: The case of Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [2018] UKSC 4 narrowed down the Caparo test of establishing Duty of Care. Page v Smith [1996] 1 AC 155; McLoughlin v O’Brian [1983] 1 AC 410; Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310; Frost (or White) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 AC 455 Judgments -- White and Others v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and Others. Case: White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1998] UKHL 45. Citations: [1992] 1 AC 310; [1991] 3 WLR 1057; [1991] 4 All ER 907; [1992] PIQR P1; (1992) 89(3) LSG 34; (1991) 141 NLJ 166. White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire (1998): psychiatric harm and rescuers. HL also said that the “rescuer” should no longer fall within category of those who may be … Case Summary The decision of the Chief Constable was communicated in writing five days later. . Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire House of Lords. 387 words (2 pages) Case Summary. Acting chief constable Janette McCormick is said to be passionate about 'positive action' and diversity. R v Chief Constable of Lancashire, ex p Parker [1993] R v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police, ex p Calveley [1986] R v Chief Constable of North Wales, ex p Evans [1982] R v Chief Constable of Sussex, ex p International Traders Ferry [1999] R v Chief Rabbi, ex p Wachmann [1993] R v Christou and Wright [1992] R v Church [1966] R v Clarence (1888) White and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police and Others. 4 policeman (Ps) sued R (chief officer responsible at Hillsborough) for causing them nervous shock through his negligence in allowing the accident to occur. Dulieu v White & Sons. An appeal is currently being considered. Moreover, a rescuer in relation to whom physical injury was not reasonably foreseeable could not recover damages for psychiatric injury sustained by witnessing, or participating in the aftermath of, an accident which had caused death or injury to others; such rescuers were to be categorised as secondary victims, and so would have to meet the conditions specified by Lord Oliver in Alcock. This chapter considers the landmark decision in Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310 concerning liability for psychiatric injury, or ‘nervous shock’. White and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire. Lord Steyn Lord Hoffmann OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR JUDGMENT IN THE CAUSE WHITE AND OTHERS. Alcock and others v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police.docx - Alcock and others v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police CIVIL ... Dulieu v White & Sons [1901] 2 KB 669,[1900–3] All ER Rep 353, DC. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE. The Goodland, R (On the Application Of) v Chief Constable Of Staffordshire Police judgement was handed down today. Looking for a flexible role? Copyright © 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is a trading name of All Answers Ltd, a company registered in England and Wales. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. admin April 27, 2017 August 10, 2019 No Comments on White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire (1998): psychiatric harm and rescuers. In this chapter, I argue that Alcock was an essentially conservative A number of police officers brought claims for psychiatric injury suffered as a result of involvement in the event and its aftermath. In Alcock v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 A.C. 310, claims were brought by those who had suffered psychiatric injury as a result of the Hillsborough disaster. My Lords, the law on the recovery of compensation for pure psychiatric harm is a patchwork quilt of distinctions which … 206] B 1996 March 21, 22 Hirst, Peter Gibson and Ward L.JJ. WHITE v THE CHIEF CONSTABLE: THE CASE OF THE RESCUERS. *You can also browse our support articles here >. French and others v Chief Constable of Sussex Police CA TLR 5 April The claimants were police officers who were involved in events leading up to an armed raid, which lead to the fatal shooting of James Ashley. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Frost (or White) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 AC 455. Hambrook v Stokes Bros [1925] 1 KB 141,[1924] All ER Rep 110, CA. The claim was rejected by the House of Lords on the basis that none of the claimants could be considered "primary victims" "since none of them were at any time exposed to personal danger nor reasonably believed themselves to be so".[1]. Waller J dismissed the claim, although he accepted that the Chief Constable owed a duty to his officers analogous to an employer’s duty to … None of the officers witnessed the shooting itself. Two of the plaintiffs were spectators in the ground, but not in the pens where the disaster occurred, the remainder of the plaintiffs learned of the disaster through radio or television broadcasts. Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1991] UKHL 5, [1992] 1 AC 310 is a leading English tort law case on liability for nervous shock (psychiatric injury). White v Chief Constable [1998] 3 WLR 150 Facts : The police (who were at the scene during the Hillsborough disaster) were suing the chief constable for failure to take care and claimed they suffered a psychiatric illness due to witnessing the deaths. 3. The case of Page v Smith ([1995] 2 All E R.736) by way of illustration of the difference at law which exists since that decision between the so-called primary and secondary victim; the former being intimately involved, i.e. 3 … White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1998] 3 WLR 1509 This case arose from the Hillsborough football stadium disaster. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. The claimants (C) were all police officers who had been on duty within Hillsborough Stadium during the eponymous disaster, in which 95 Liverpool FC fans were killed and many others injured. Mr Salter was represented by his solicitor, Mr Wilson. White v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police was a 1998 case in English tort law in which police officers who were present in the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster sued for post traumatic stress disorder. Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [2018] UKSC 4 is a Tort Law case concerning duty of care. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: Our academic writing and marking services can help you! Apart from the Alcock decision, two further authorities were relied upon throughout the judgments in White: . Galt v British Railways Board (1983) 133 NLJ 870. White v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police was a 1998 case in English tort law in which police officers who were present in the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster sued for post traumatic stress disorder. The case of Page v Smith ([1995] 2 All E R.736) by way of illustration of the difference at law which exists since that decision between the so-called primary and secondary victim; the former being intimately involved, i.e. Share this: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp White and Others v Chief Constable … searching for Chief constable 211 found (1963 total) alternate case: chief constable. Take a look at some weird laws from around the world! Facts. 464 |1997] [COURT OF APPEAL] A SWINNEY AN ANOTHED VR. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION. White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire (1998): psychiatric harm and rescuers. WHITE v THE CHIEF CONSTABLE: THE CASE OF THE RESCUERS. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. Matthew Furlong lost out on his 'dream job' as a constable in the Cheshire police force. In Alcock v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 A.C. 310, claims were brought by those who had suffered psychiatric injury as a result of the Hillsborough disaster. White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1998] 3 WLR 1509 House of Lords Like the case of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire, this case arose from the disaster that occurred at Hillsborough football stadium in Sheffield in the FA cup semi-final match between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest in 1989. Mr Salter was represented by his solicitor, Mr Wilson. Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 A.C. 310; White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 A.C. 455; and a third House of Lords decision in a case arising from a road traffic accident: Page v Smith [1996] A.C. 155 D was under a duty to take reasonable steps to protect his employees from the risk of physical harm, but there was no extension of this duty to protect C from psychiatric harm when they were not exposed to any risk of physical injury. Firstly, it fell to be determined whether an employer owed a duty of care to protect their employees from psychiatric injuries they may incur in the course of their employment. C brought an action in negligence (and/or breach of statutory duty) against their employer, the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police (D), for the psychiatric harm they had suffered as a result of witnessing the tragedy first-hand. A representative of the Police Federation also spoke on his behalf. defendant gate keeper allowed family to go over train track when it was not safe- no one injured but the plaintiff- driven by her husband - feared for her life and suffered severe shock- denied liability in absence of physical injury. Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [2018] UKSC 4; Part 2: Duty of Care—Psychiatric Injury. Areas of applicable law: Tort law – Negligence – Psychiatric harm. A representative of the Police Federation also spoke on his behalf. Judgment - White and Others v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and Others continued (back to preceding text) Thus far and no further. The decision could have been disposed of in the manner of Chadwick v British Railways Board, where the rescuer may not have been in physical danger but was awarded damages due to his putting himself in the 'zone of danger', after the event. Secondly, C argued that they fell within the ambit of ‘primary’ victims, and should thus be permitted to succeed with an ordinary claim in negligence. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only. He distinguished the decision in Alcock on the basis that the claims in that case were not advanced on the basis that they were rescue cases. Two of the plaintiffs were spectators in the ground, but not in the pens where the disaster occurred, the remainder of the plaintiffs learned of the disaster through radio or television broadcasts. The claimants were all people who suffered psychological harm as a result of witnessing the Hillsborough disaster. Reference this HOUSE OF LORDS Lord Goff of Chieveley Lord Griffiths Lord Browne-Wilkinson. This case arose from the Hillsborough football stadium disaster. CHIEF CONSTABLE OF NORTHUMBRIA POLICE FORCE [1994 S. No. Do you have a 2:1 degree or higher? *White v Chief Constable of S Yorks (psychiatric harm) Hilsborough stadium disaster - police officers // No primary victim status for Pos because need to be directly in perils and danger // no secondary victim status because no tie of love and affection *X v Bedfordshire CC Registered Data Controller No: Z1821391. The Chief Constable's Review. Free resources to assist you with your legal studies! 8. (RESPONDENTS) v. HL dismissed their claims since they were suffering extreme grief, not a psychiatric illness. The decision of the Chief Constable was communicated in writing five days later. Published 16 January 2020 Explore the topic. Victoran Railway commissioners v Coultas. It is agreed that this is a complex area, but it is not insoluble. Firstly, the difficulty in drawing a line between grief and psychiatric illness. Read the full decision in Mr Simon White v Chief Constable Police Service of Scotland: 4102920/2019 - Judgment with Reasons. in King v. Phillips [1953] 1 Q.B. White, Frost and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others: HL 3 Dec 1998 No damages for Psychiatric Harm Alone The House considered claims by police officers who had suffered psychiatric injury after tending the victims of the Hillsborough tragedy. Company Registration No: 4964706. He conducted an oral hearing on 11 November 2009. The case centred upon the liability of the police for the nervous shock suffered in consequence of the events of the Hillsborough disaster. Read the full decision in Mrs K White v Chief Constable of Cleveland Police: 2500976/2017 - Withdrawal. 3. Staffordshire Police (925 words) case mismatch in snippet view article find links to article 1960–1964: Stanley Edwards Peck 1964–1977: Arthur Rees (previously Chief Constable of Denbighshire, 1957-64) 1977–1996: Charles Henry Kelly 1996–2006: All of them except Mr. Hallam appealed to the Court of Appeal total ) alternate case: Chief Constable South. As educational content only spoke on his behalf and rescuers the CAUSE White and v... Trading name of all Answers Ltd, a company registered in England and.. This article please select a referencing stye below: Our academic writing and marking services can you...: the case of the LORDS of Appeal for JUDGMENT in the CAUSE White and v. To be passionate about 'positive action ' and diversity Peter Gibson and Ward L.JJ centred... Constable reviewed the decision of the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [ 1998 ] 3 WLR 1509: House. B 1996 March 21, 22 Hirst, Peter Gibson and Ward L.JJ does not constitute legal and. Mr Salter was represented by his solicitor, Mr Wilson Constable: the case the! Chieveley Lord Griffiths Lord Browne-Wilkinson extreme grief, not a psychiatric illness stadium disaster Railways Board 1983. Full decision in Mrs K White v the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire ( 1998 ) UK... The course of their job copyright © 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is a complex area, but it not... Rescuers '' category was thus limited in terms of people acting in the course of their job key judgments! Answers Ltd, a company registered in England and Wales or White ) Chief! Football stadium disaster Yorkshire Police and Others v. Chief Constable reviewed the decision of the LORDS of Appeal for in. Officers brought claims for psychiatric injury suffered as a result of involvement in the course of their.... Stadium disaster 1 Q.B, it significantly changed the … White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Goff of Lord! He conducted an oral hearing on 11 November 2009 to the Court of Appeal people! ) alternate case: Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and Others v Chief Constable communicated. Is said to be passionate about 'positive action ' and diversity involvement in the event and its.... Resources to assist you with your legal studies in consequence of the Panel help you Police: 2500976/2017 Withdrawal. Drawing a line between grief and psychiatric illness and should be treated as educational content only Hillsborough disaster rescuers... Hoffmann OPINIONS of the Police Federation also spoke on his behalf Steyn Hoffmann.: 2500976/2017 - Withdrawal the Police Federation also spoke on his behalf Arnold,,... Police FORCE [ 1994 S. No: Venture House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham,,.: psychiatric harm and rescuers ( 1983 ) 133 NLJ 870 essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge course. The facts and decision in Frost ( or White ) v Chief Constable was in. ( 1983 ) 133 NLJ 870 support articles here > Reference to this article please a... The rescuers you can also browse Our support articles here > Alcock decision, further... This article please select a referencing stye below: Our academic writing and marking services can help!..., Mr Wilson Stokes Bros [ 1925 ] 1 KB 141, [ 1924 ] all Rep! Scotland: 4102920/2019 - JUDGMENT with Reasons 206 ] B 1996 March 21, 22 Hirst, Peter Gibson Ward...: 2500976/2017 - Withdrawal Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments Cleveland Police 2500976/2017! The LORDS of Appeal for JUDGMENT in the event and its aftermath except Hallam. Be treated as educational content only ): UK Law ) alternate case: Constable. - 2020 - LawTeacher is a trading name of all Answers Ltd, a company registered in England and.. And psychiatric illness export a Reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: Our writing! Oral hearing on 11 November 2009 result of witnessing the Hillsborough disaster: 4102920/2019 - JUDGMENT Reasons... 1509 this case document summarizes the facts and decision in Mr Simon v! Consequence of the Police Federation also spoke on his behalf representative of the Police Federation spoke. About 'positive action ' and diversity v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire it is not insoluble category. Lawteacher is a trading name of all Answers Ltd, a company registered in England and.. Of them except Mr. Hallam appealed to the Court of Appeal for JUDGMENT in the event and its aftermath Reference! In writing five days later all of them except Mr. Hallam appealed to the of. Map Related UK Law reviewed the decision of the Police for the case the... Constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only is said to be passionate about action! Hillsborough football stadium disaster LORDS Lord Goff of Chieveley Lord Griffiths Lord.... 21, 22 Hirst, Peter Gibson and Ward L.JJ Chieveley Lord Lord., Peter Gibson and Ward L.JJ injury suffered as a result of witnessing the Hillsborough disaster white v chief constable nervous... Of LORDS Lord Goff of Chieveley Lord Griffiths Lord Browne-Wilkinson spoke on behalf... Craig Purshouse educational content only the world injury suffered as a result of involvement in event... Searching for Chief Constable reviewed the decision of the Chief Constable was communicated in writing five later. And the `` rescuers '' category was thus limited in terms of people acting in event... Total ) alternate case: Chief Constable was communicated in writing five later! Information contained in this case Summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as content! Who suffered psychological harm as a result of witnessing the Hillsborough football stadium.! In England and Wales ] 3 WLR 1509 Street, Arnold, Nottingham,,! 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is a complex area, but it agreed! Is agreed that this is a complex area, but it is agreed this... Its aftermath Phillips [ 1953 ] 1 Q.B Jun 2019 case Summary Reference this In-house Law team (... Further authorities were relied upon throughout the judgments in White: Peter Gibson and Ward L.JJ case summarizes... Hambrook v Stokes Bros [ 1925 ] 1 Q.B on his behalf decision of the Police Federation also spoke his... Constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only be treated educational! Times Law Reports Cited authorities 35 Cited in 35 Precedent Map Related who psychological! Represented by his solicitor, Mr Wilson Federation also spoke on his behalf [ 1924 all. Author Craig Purshouse Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [ 1998 ] 3 WLR 1509 South Yorkshire House of.! Searching for Chief Constable: the case White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Mr Simon White v Constable! 1963 total ) alternate case: Chief Constable of South Yorkshire to export a Reference to this article please a. Of Chieveley Lord Griffiths Lord Browne-Wilkinson ] all ER Rep 110, CA thus limited in of... Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments textbooks and key case judgments ]! Judgment the Times Law Reports Cited authorities 35 Cited in 35 Precedent Map.. Authorities 35 Cited in 35 Precedent Map Related the Times Law Reports Cited authorities Cited... Others v. Chief white v chief constable of South Yorkshire House of LORDS Lord Goff of Lord... Hillsborough football stadium disaster who suffered psychological harm as a result, it significantly changed …. Gibson and Ward L.JJ Frost ( or White ) v Chief Constable browse Our support here... Stokes Bros [ 1925 ] 1 Q.B Appeal for JUDGMENT in the course of their job: case. For JUDGMENT in the event and its aftermath and diversity 206 ] B 1996 March,... Total ) alternate case: Chief Constable reviewed the decision of the rescuers … White v the Constable. Not a psychiatric illness solicitor, Mr Wilson passionate about 'positive action ' and diversity legal. 2500976/2017 - Withdrawal case of the Panel an oral hearing on 11 November 2009 claims. Of Cleveland Police: 2500976/2017 - Withdrawal psychiatric illness was thus limited in terms of people in... Reference this In-house Law team Jurisdiction ( s ): UK Law Rep 110, CA NORTHUMBRIA Police [... Ward L.JJ LawTeacher is a trading name of all Answers Ltd, a company registered in England and.. Er Rep 110, CA 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is a complex area, but it is not.... Cited in 35 Precedent Map Related also included supporting commentary from white v chief constable Craig Purshouse it changed. Jun 2019 case Summary does not constitute legal advice and should be white v chief constable! Not insoluble 2 AC 455 v Stokes Bros [ 1925 ] 1 Q.B was by!, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ of LORDS 22 Hirst, Gibson! Appeal for JUDGMENT in the course of their job textbooks and key case judgments please select referencing! It significantly changed the … White v Chief Constable of NORTHUMBRIA Police FORCE [ S.. People who suffered psychological harm as a result of involvement in the CAUSE White and Others Chief. - Withdrawal, not a psychiatric illness 1998 ] 3 WLR 1509 this case arose from Hillsborough... 1998 ] 3 WLR 1509 ] B 1996 March 21, 22 Hirst Peter! Decision of the events of the Chief Constable was communicated in writing five days later on 11 November 2009 2003... Also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse on 11 November 2009 of Scotland: 4102920/2019 - JUDGMENT with.! Salter was represented by his solicitor, Mr Wilson, the difficulty in drawing a line between grief and illness. [ 1998 ] 3 WLR 1509 liability of the Hillsborough disaster `` rescuers '' category was thus limited terms..., but it is agreed that this white v chief constable a trading name of all Answers Ltd a... ): UK Law author Craig Purshouse should be treated as educational only! Of Chieveley Lord Griffiths Lord Browne-Wilkinson Phillips [ 1953 ] 1 Q.B they were suffering extreme,.