The principle of foreseeability of psychiatric injury is subject to the qualification that, where the psychiatric injury suffered by the plaintiff is consequential upon physical injury for which the defendant is responsible in law, the defendant will be bound to compensate the plaintiff in respect of the former even if unforeseeable. This is an application of the rule that a wrongdoer must take his victim as he finds him–sometimes called the ‘talem qualem’ rule or, more colloquially, the ‘eggshell skull’ rule. There is no difference in principle between an eggshell skull and an eggshell personality.
Geoffrey Lane J
 3 All ER 508
England and Wales
- Cited – 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.
Held: The general rules restricting the recovery of damages for pure psychiatric harm applied to the . .
Gazette 13-Jan-99,  1 All ER 1,  2 AC 455,  UKHL 45,  ICR 216,  3 WLR 1509,  IRLR 110, (1999) 45 BMLR 1
- Cited – Donachie v The Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police CA 7-Apr-2004
The claimant had been asked to work under cover. The surveillance equipment he was asked to use was faulty, requiring him to put himself at risk repeatedly to maintain it resulting in a stress disorder and a stroke.
Held: There was a direct . .
 EWCA Civ 405
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 02 December 2020; Ref: scu.184751