Novel genetic disease claim struck out: A and M v University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust (High Court, 15 April 2016 Judge McKenna)

In the present case, there was no doubt that the claimant had suffered profound distress as a consequence of the sequence of events which unfolded after initial realisation that his wife was not recovering as expected from surgery. However, the circumstances with which Mr Ronayne was confronted ‘‘fall far short of those which have been recognised by the law as founding secondary victim liability.’’ The judge was wrong in his conclusion. The events were not, unlike those in Walters, ‘‘a seamless tale with an obvious beginning and an equally obvious end.’’ Rather, there was a series of events over a period of time and no inexorable progression. Mr Ronayne suffered nothing like the ‘‘assault upon the senses’’ to which Mrs Walters awoke. He knew before seeing his wife that she was due to go into theatre for immediate surgery, and knew that meant her condition was serious. It followed that this was not a case where there was a sudden appreciation of a shocking event. On the contrary, there was a series of events which gave rise to an accumulation of gradual assaults upon the claimant’s mind. At each stage in this sequence the claimant ‘‘was conditioned for what he was about to perceive.’’ There was nothing sudden or unexpected about being ushered in to see his wife and finding her connected to medical equipment. Overall, what the claimant saw was not horrifying by objective standards. On both the first and second occasions, what Mr Ronayne saw was such as would ordinarily be expected of a person in hospital in the circumstances in which Mrs Ronayne found herself. What was required in order to found liability was something exceptional in nature. The court could readily accept that the appearance of Mrs Ronayne on the second occasion must have been alarming and distressing. However, it was not in context exceptional. Furthermore, the fact that Mr Ronayne did not suffer intrusive recollection of events told against the visual images of his wife being the trigger for his psychological condition. For all these reasons, the ruling of the judge would be overturned and judgment would be entered for the trust. Amanda Yip QC and Simon Fox (instructed by Maxwell Hodge) appeared for Mr Ronayne. Charles Cory-Wright QC (instructed by Hill Dickinson) appeared for the trust.