Home › Guides › Psychiatric injury in personal injury claims
Psychiatric injury claims are personal injury cases where the claimant’s loss is primarily mental health harm rather than physical injury, or where psychiatric harm has resulted from a physical injury. These cases have become increasingly common as awareness of psychological trauma and mental health has grown. Successful psychiatric injury claims require clear medical evidence of a recognised psychiatric condition causally linked to the incident complained of.
What counts as psychiatric injury
Psychiatric injury in law must be a recognised medical condition, not merely emotional distress or upset. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is the most common condition in these claims. PTSD typically develops after exposure to a serious threat to life or safety (such as a road traffic accident, violent assault, or workplace accident) and involves intrusive memories, avoidance of reminders, negative mood changes, and hyperarousal (excessive startle response). Other conditions seen in personal injury claims include adjustment disorder (difficulty adapting to a stressful event), depression (persistent low mood and loss of interest), and anxiety disorders. General distress, grief, or sadness, however understandable, do not count as psychiatric injury for compensation purposes.
Primary and secondary victims
The law distinguishes between primary victims and secondary victims. Primary victims are those directly exposed to the incident—the person injured in a road traffic accident, the worker in a workplace accident, the person assaulted. A primary victim who sustains psychiatric injury as a result of their injury or the incident itself can usually claim compensation if causation is established.
Secondary victims are bystanders or witnesses to an incident who suffer psychiatric injury. English law imposes stricter requirements on secondary victims than primary victims. A secondary victim must show:
- They were in a recognised relationship with the primary victim (usually a close family member)
- They had a sufficiently proximate relationship to the incident (either present at the scene, or near it shortly after)
- They suffered foreseeable psychiatric injury
A parent who witnesses their child hit by a car, or an employee who witnesses a colleague seriously injured at work, might be a secondary victim. A person who hears about an accident via phone call but was not present faces a much higher bar for claiming psychiatric injury. The law is deliberately restrictive for secondary victims to prevent unlimited liability for trivial incidents.
Why a psychiatric expert report is needed
In almost all psychiatric injury claims, the claimant’s solicitor will instruct a psychiatric expert to prepare a report. This is because:
Medical diagnosis and evidence: The expert must document that the claimant meets diagnostic criteria for a recognised condition (such as PTSD under ICD-11 or DSM-5). Diagnosis requires careful assessment; trauma alone does not automatically cause PTSD, and some people develop PTSD while others who experience identical incidents do not.
Causation: The expert must address whether the psychiatric condition was caused by the incident complained of. This is complex because many people have pre-existing vulnerabilities or previous mental health history. The expert must analyse: Did the condition start after the incident? Are the symptoms consistent with the type of incident? Could other factors (such as ongoing stress, bereavement, or job loss) explain the condition? What does the literature say about cause and effect?
Quantifying loss: Psychiatric injury damages are based on the severity of the condition, its impact on functioning (work, relationships, daily activities), and prognosis. An expert explains these impacts and what recovery is likely. This informs the court’s assessment of compensation.
Credibility and consistency: Experts are alert to inconsistencies (for example, a claimant reporting severe PTSD with hyperarousal who has nonetheless been working full-time without incident, or whose social media shows activities inconsistent with reported symptoms). The expert does not assess credibility in the sense a judge does, but can note inconsistencies relevant to the medical picture.
What the expert assesses
A psychiatric expert in a personal injury claim will investigate:
Detailed history of the incident: What exactly happened, the claimant’s account of exposure and threat, and how they perceived the danger at the time. Even if the claimant was objectively safe, their subjective perception at the time matters for PTSD causation.
Immediate reactions: What was the claimant’s response in the hours and days after the incident? Did they experience acute distress, flashbacks, or hyperarousal? PTSD typically begins within days or weeks of the incident.
Pre-incident mental health: Was the claimant entirely well before? Did they have previous depression, anxiety, or substance misuse? This does not prevent a claim but affects prognosis and the degree to which the incident caused the current condition.
Current symptoms: Detailed questioning about intrusive memories, nightmares, triggers, avoidance of places or activities, sleep, concentration, mood, and ability to work and socialise.
Functional impact: Can the claimant work? Are relationships affected? Have they needed to reduce hours or change jobs? Can they manage activities of daily living?
Treatment received: What therapy or medication has been tried? Is the claimant engaging with treatment? How have they responded?
Prognosis: With treatment, how likely is recovery? What is the expected timescale? Will symptoms be lifelong or time-limited? Will there be residual disability?
Timing of assessment
The timing of assessment after an incident is important. Assessing someone within days or weeks of a traumatic incident may show acute distress that will resolve with time. Assessing someone months or years later shows what enduring harm has developed. Most experts will see a claimant for the first time months after the incident (while initial legal steps are being taken), but may also review earlier medical records from GPs or therapists that document the claimant’s presentation earlier on.
In some cases, a second expert assessment may be carried out closer to trial to show how the claimant’s condition has evolved (improved or worsened). Changes in condition over time help the expert and court understand prognosis and whether the claimed long-term effects are realistic.
From diagnosis to damages
Once psychiatric injury is established, compensation is awarded for past losses (medical treatment, lost earnings, care costs) and future losses (ongoing treatment, reduced earning capacity, cost of adaptations). A severe case of chronic PTSD resulting in permanent unfitness to work attracts higher damages than a case where the claimant has recovered within a few years. The psychiatric expert’s evidence on severity, likely course, and recovery timeframe directly informs the damages award.
Key points
- Psychiatric injury must be a recognised medical condition (such as PTSD, adjustment disorder, or depression), not mere emotional distress
- Primary victims (directly exposed to the incident) are treated differently in law from secondary victims (bystanders or witnesses)
- Psychiatric expert evidence is necessary to establish diagnosis, causation, impact, and prognosis
- The expert assesses the incident details, the claimant’s immediate and ongoing symptoms, pre-incident mental health, response to treatment, and likely future course
- Timing of assessment matters; early assessment shows acute reaction, later assessment shows enduring effects
- The expert’s findings on severity and prognosis directly influence the level of damages awarded
Related: Find a medico-legal expert