X', a fisher woman alighted from a tramcar. While the conductor was helping her to put the fish basket on her head, a motor cyclist 'Y' passed the tram and immediately afterwards negligently collided with Z's motor car. 'Y' was killed. 'X' did not see 'Y' or the accident which occurred fifteen yards away because her view was blocked by the tram. She, however, heard the collision and after 'Y's body has been removed, she approached the spot and saw the blood left on the road. In consequence, she had a nervous shock and gave birth to still-born child as she was then eight months' pregnant. If she sues the representatives of 'Y' for 'Y's negligence, then:

A. They would be liable because 'Y' owed a duty to take care towards her

B. They would be liable because 'Y' had a duty to take care though he was not negligent

C. They would not be liable because 'Y' did not own any duty of care towards her and he was also not negligent to her

D. None of the above would be a valid proposition

Answer: Option C