2 (a) That's probably right. A has likely suffered psychiatric harm. Psychiatric damage is caused by a sudden assault on the nervous system - seeing, hearing or touching something so distressing it causes a recognisable psychiatric illness. Such harm seems to exist in the case-study (which is based on Jaensch v Coffey (1984) 155 CLR 549). The following points are important:
(a) It is not enough to just allege 'psychiatric damage' or 'nervous shock'. A plaintiff must be able to prove that the defendant's acts or omissions caused a medically recognised illness beyond mere grief, distress or any other normal emotion.
(b) It must have been reasonably foreseeable that an ordinarily strong-nerved person - one with 'ordinary phlegm' - would suffer some shock. However it is not required that the actual extent of shock to a particular plaintiff was foreseeable.