Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire
Court: House of Lords
Facts: Claimants suffered psychiatric harm from the Hillsborough disaster. The police admitted negligence but contested the duty of care.
Issue: Duty of care for psychiatric harm and proximity to the event. Did the police owe the claimants a duty of care with respect to their psychiatric harm?
Held: The House of Lords held in favor of the defendant, rejecting the claims. All claims were dismissed, the 3 elements in McLoughlin applied and was not met in each of the cases
Lord Keith: Psychiatric harm depends on proximity; foreseeability alone is not enough. Proximity is determined by close ties or direct involvement.
Lord Ackner: Closer ties of affection should be considered, but broadcasts alone are insufficient.
Lord Jauncey: Proximity can be established by direct sight or hearing of the event or immediate aftermath.