header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
08 November 2007 / Andrew Tucker , Andrew Buckham
Issue: 7296 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Forgotten defenders

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Are we failing our armed forces? ask Andrew Buckham and Andrew Tucker

The scale of compensation payable to injured service personnel under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) is under scrutiny after details of the case of Lance Bombardier Ben Parkinson were highlighted by the media. Ben, aged 24, a soldier serving on an operational tour in Afghanistan, sustained multiple injuries as a result of a mine strike. Ben submitted an application under AFCS, a scheme described by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) on its introduction in 2005 as a scheme that “gives modern, fair and simpler arrangements, which focuses help better on the more severely disabled”.

However, the award of £152,150 afforded to Ben under AFCS highlighted that there are significant problems in the way in which the scheme assesses compensation for service personnel who have suffered multiple injuries, and that the scheme needed to be urgently reviewed. Ben’s case has also brought into sharp focus the commitment and sacrifice members of the British armed forces make, what they may expect to

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
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll