header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

​Duty to those on duty

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
02 October 2015 / Elizabeth Milbourn
Issue: 7670 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail
web_milbourn

When is military personnel owed a duty of care outside combat situations? Elizabeth Milbourn investigates

In Vaughan v Ministry of Defence [2015] EWHC 1404 (QB), [2015] All ER (D) 207 (May) the claimant royal marine injured himself while away on basic training during some free time. The claimant brought a claim in negligence against the Ministry of Defence (MoD). The Queen’s Bench Division dismissed the claim on the basis that that the duty did not apply at the time of the accident and that the corporal in charge of the training exercise did not breach his duty of care.

Background

Until 1987, s 10 of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 prevented military personnel from bringing actions against the Crown in respect of death or personal injury caused by other members of the British Armed Forces. Section 10 was suspended by the Crown Proceedings (Armed Forces) Act 1987.

Members of the armed forces who have been injured in an accident are therefore able to pursue a claim against the MoD for breach of

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
DWF—19 appointments

DWF—19 appointments

Belfast team bolstered by three senior hires and 16 further appointments

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Firm strengthens leveraged finance team with London partner hire

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Double hire marks launch of family team in Leeds

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Traders’ convictions quashed in Libor shock
The Supreme Court issued a landmark judgment in July that overturned the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, once poster boys of the Libor and Euribor scandal. In NLJ this week, Neil Swift of Peters & Peters considers what the ruling means for financial law enforcement
NLJ this week: Pro bono power without the red tape
Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre makes the case for ‘General Practice Pro Bono’—using core legal skills to deliver life-changing support, without the need for niche expertise—in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: DNA evidence—justice on ice?
In this week's NLJ, Steven Ball of Red Lion Chambers unpacks how advances in forensic science finally unmasked Ryland Headley, jailed in 2025 for the 1967 rape and murder of 75-year-old Louisa Dunne. Preserved swabs and palm prints lay dormant for decades until DNA-17 profiling produced a billion-to-one match
NLJ this week: Small firms call for tech clarity as AI looms
Small law firms want to embrace technology but feel lost in a maze of jargon, costs and compliance fears, writes Aisling O’Connell of the Solicitors Regulation Authority in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Fraud claims climb as courts brace for AI threats
Charlie Mercer and Astrid Gillam of Stewarts crunch the numbers on civil fraud claims in the English courts, in this week's NLJ. New data shows civil fraud claims rising steadily since 2014, with the King’s Bench Division overtaking the Commercial Court as the forum of choice for lower-value disputes
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll