Compensability for Psychological Injuries Arising From Breach of Contract, Deceit and Contravention of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and Fair Trading Acts: The Need for Rationalisation and Consistency in the Law: Aldersea v Public Transport Corporation [2001] 3 VR 499; [2001] VSC 169

The circumstances in which psychological injuries are compensable in Australia are unclear. By and large tort and contract law do not permit recovery by plaintiffs other than for psychiatric injuries, namely for well recognised mental illnesses. In addition, in tort “nervous shock” and the plaintiff being of “ordinary fortitude”, unless the tortfeasor knows otherwise of the plaintiff, are prerequisites to recovery. However, where the action is for breach of a statutory duty or for deceit, the criteria for recovery appear to be more liberal; to a lesser degree this is also so for actions framed in contract. This article examines the ramifications of the statement of the law by Ashley J in Aldersea v Public Transport Corporation [2001] 3 VR 499; [2001] VSC 169 in the context of the disuniformity and absence of rationality highlighted by modern Australian jurisprudence on the compensability of psychological and psychiatric injuries.