Under s 33 of the Civil Liability Act 1936 (SA), the phrase 'in the plaintiff's position' requires regard to the particular background, education, experience, and physical characteristics of the plaintiff when assessing whether a person of normal fortitude might suffer psychiatric illness. The normal fortitude test is a control mechanism limiting liability, not a precondition; the inquiry is not whether the plaintiff was of normal fortitude but whether a reasonable person in the defendant's position would have foreseen that a person of normal fortitude in the plaintiff's position might suffer any psychiatric illness (not the specific illness suffered). The foreseeability standard from Wyong Shire v [name withheld] applies: the possibility need only be not far-fetched or fanciful. The SA provision is broader than interstate equivalents (NSW, Vic, WA, Tas) because it requires regard to characteristics personal to the plaintiff.
The full text is available to signed-in members.