Arrange the following landmark decision in their ascending order relating to development of law of torts under concept of nervous shock:
A. R v. Phillips
B. Dulieu v. White
C. Hambrook v. Stokes Brothers
D. Bourhill v. Young
Choose the correct answer from the options given below:

Correct option is A

The correct answer is: (a) B, C, D, A

Detailed Explanation

Arranging the given landmark cases relating to the development of the law of torts under the concept of Nervous Shock / Psychiatric Illness in ascending chronological order:

• B. Dulieu v. White & Sons [1901] 2 KB 669:

Established that damages could be recovered for nervous shock provided it arose from a reasonable fear of immediate personal injury to oneself.

• C. Hambrook v. Stokes Brothers [1925] 1 KB 141:

Extended recovery for nervous shock beyond self-preservation, holding that a mother could recover damages for shock caused by fear of immediate safety/injury to her children (secondary victim).

• D. Bourhill v. Young [1943] AC 92:

The House of Lords established the requirement of foreseeability of harm and relational/spatial proximity. A pregnant fishwife who heard a motorcycle crash and later saw blood on the road was held not to be a foreseeable victim owed a duty of care.

• A. R. v. Phillips [1949] / later modern cases:

Represents later judicial developments addressing psychiatric injury/nervous shock.