Author: Freckelton I.

Source: Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, Volume 9, Number 2, 1 May 2002 , pp. 271-283(13)

Publisher: Australian Academic Press

Abstract:

The landmark judgments of the High Court in Tame v New South Wales ; Annetts v Australian Stations Pty Ltd 1 High Court decisions, in so doing examining the latest policy-maker and legislative responses to the insurance crisis in relation to "nervous shock" litigation requirements for compensability. It calls for a moratorium in legislative and policy-maker responses to the High Court decisions to enable an informed evaluation of the pressures placed upon insurers by what is likely to be only a moderate increase in the incidence of successful actions by plaintiffs in psychiatric injury litigation. appear to be on the brink of being overtaken by legislative attempts to reform tort law by reducing the capacity for major calls upon insurance funds. This article reviews the common law and policy ramifications of the

Document Type: Commentary

Affiliations: 1: Barrister, Faculty of Law, Department of Psychological Medicine, Monash University, La Trobe Law, La Trobe University, Australia

Publication date: 2002-05-01

More about this publication?

• Information for Authors
• Subscribe to this Title
• Terms & Conditions
• Library Recommendation Form
• ingentaconnect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites

Related content

• In this: publication
• By this: publisher
• In this Subject: Neurology & Psychiatry ,  Psychology ,  Law
• By this author: Freckelton I.

Website © Publishing Technology. Article copyright remains with the publisher, society or author(s) as specified within the article.

• Terms and conditions
• Privacy policy
• Information for advertisers