Abstract
By comparison with the clear damage present in tort claims for traumatic injury, for example, following a road accident, the effect of pollution on the person is frequently resistant to immediate perception. This paper will examine some of the difficulties which the nature of harm can imply when looking to the common law to address environmental damage to the person. The generalised nature of environmental damage, together with its intangible or latent effects, can distort the operation of liability rules, which more commonly address traumatic injury. The notion of personal injury is, however, somewhat under-examined in English law. It will be argued here that although the nature of environmental damage will sometimes present overwhelming challenges in civil claims, the common law can accommodate certain of the less substantial personal harms which are characteristic of environmental damage to the person. This involves considering the margins of recognised personal injury and the possibility of recovery for psychiatric illness brought about by exposure to pollution.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
