Article 2.4.9 Emotional Distress and Psychological Harm

(a) Intentional or Reckless Infliction of Emotional Distress:

(i) Liability arises where a person intentionally or recklessly engages in conduct that:

(ii) Is so extreme, outrageous, or grossly offensive that a reasonable person could not be expected to endure it;

(iii) Is directed at or foreseeably affects the claimant; and

(iv) Causes serious emotional distress, evidenced by medical diagnosis, expert opinion, or other corroborated indicia of psychological injury.

(v) However, no person shall be liable for conduct which also constitutes protected expression, such as political speech or works of art.

(b) Remedies:

In relation to causes of action under this Article, the ICT Court may order:

(i) Compensatory damages proportionate to the severity, duration, and impact of the harm;

(ii) Injunctive relief, including no-contact, removal, or restraint orders;

(iii) Declaratory relief affirming the breach and claimant’s rights;

(c) Operator Immunity:

The Operator and its authorised agents or personnel shall not be liable for emotional harm arising from lawful administrative decisions, policy implementation, enforcement actions, or infrastructure deployment, unless the conduct meets the elements within Article 2.4.9(a) and not subject to the immunities in Article 2.4.10(b).

(d) Procedural and Evidentiary Standards:

(i) The ICT Court may require expert evidence to establish causation, severity, and diagnosis of psychological harm.

(ii) Emotional harm shall not be presumed and shall be established through objectively verifiable means.

(iii) Where multiple contributing causes exist, liability shall be apportioned according to the principles of contributory fault under this ICT Code.