KING v PHILCOX [2015] HCA 19
Yesterday, the High Court handed down a significant decision in
the context of personal injury claims within South Australia. The
decision concerns the interpretation and application of Sections 33
and 53 of the Civil Liability Act 1936, which were
introduced as part of a suite of amendments in 2004 with the
intention of curtailing the class of persons who could recover
damages for negligently inflicted mental harm.
THE BACKGROUND
On 12th April 2005, the respondent's brother was a passenger
in a motor vehicle driven by the appellant, which was involved in
an accident due to the appellant's negligence. The
respondent's brother was trapped in the wreckage and died at
the scene. After the collision, the respondent drove through the
relevant intersection and witnessed the accident aftermath on five
separate occasions. Each time, the respondent was not distressed by
anything he had witnessed and furthermore had no awareness that
