Court case[1901] 2 KB 669

The plaintiff, a pregnant woman, was behind the bar of her husband's public house when a servant of the defendants negligently drove a pair-horse van into the premises, crashing into the building. The plaintiff was not struck, but she was put in fear for her own safety and suffered a severe nervous shock. She became seriously ill and gave birth prematurely. She sued the defendants for damages. The defendants argued, relying on Victorian Railways Commissioners v. Coultas, that the statement of claim disclosed no cause of action, since there had been no physical impact on the plaintiff.

The Divisional Court (Kennedy and Phillimore JJ.) held that the claim disclosed a cause of action. Impact was not required: an illness caused by shock is physical damage as truly as a wound, and the medical link between fright and illness was a question of evidence. Coultas was not followed. Kennedy J. however set a limit: "the shock, where it operates, must be a shock which arises from a reasonable fear of immediate personal injury to oneself". A person shocked merely by fear of injury to another, or to property, could not, in his view, recover, because the defendant owed a duty only to those in the area of danger.