Your World of Legal Intelligence
 United Kingdom | +44 (0) 20 7284 8080

Townsley v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland

Northern Ireland Law Reports (Digests) Cited authorities 4 Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
JurisdictionNorthern Ireland
Judgment Date01 January 1995
Date01 January 1995
CourtCourt of Appeal (Northern Ireland)
(C.A., N.I.)
Townsley
and
Secretary of State for Northern Ireland

- Entitlement to compensation - Proximity test - Claimant suffering psychiatric disturbance after learning that her children had been subjected to serious sexual abuse by neighbour - Whether claimant entitled to compensation - Whether claimant's condition "directly attributable" to sexual abuse - Whether claimant required to meet proximity test - Criminal Injuries (Compensation) (Northern Ireland) Order, 1977 (S.I. No. 1248), art. 2 (2).

Between December, 1984, and March, 1986, the respondent's three children were subjected to very serious sexual abuse by an elderly man who was a neighbour. When the respondent learned of the sexual abuse she was greatly shocked and upset and suffered serious psychiatric disturbance. She claimed compensation under art. 3(1) of the Criminal Injuries (Compensation) (Northern Ireland) Order, 1977, on the ground that she had sustained a 'criminal injury' which was defined in art. 2(2) of the order as 'an injury … directly attributable to-(a) a violent offence'. Sheil J. held that the respondent's psychiatric condition was directly attributable to the sexual abuse as the abuse was the causa causans or effective cause of the condition. He accordingly awarded her compensation of £25,000. The Secretary of State appealed contending that since a decision of the House of Lords in 1991 proximity was now part of the concept of causation and that unless a plaintiff or applicant was sufficiently proximate to an action or event, that action could not be a causa causans. Held - The proximity test in tort related to the extent and ambit of the duty of care and did not alter the law as to what would be a causa causans and should not be applied to determine whether an injury was 'directly attributable' to a crime of violence. Whether an act complained of was a causa causans was a question of fact and degree and there was ample authority supporting the conclusion reached in the instant case that the respondent's psychiatric condition was directly attributable to the violent offences committed against her children and that she was...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT