header-logo header-logo

HRA 1998: who benefits?

15 July 2010 / Richard Scorer
Issue: 7426 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Richard Scorer considers the lessons & consequences of Smith

The issue of whether British soldiers serving overseas should have the benefit of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) was considered by the Supreme Court in a judgment delivered on 30 June 2010 (R (on the application of Smith) v Secretary of State for Defence [2010] UKSC 29, [2010] All ER (D) 261 (Jun)). The issue has provoked much media debate, including some ill informed comment in the tabloid press.

The case before the Supreme Court arose from the death in Iraq in 2003 of Private Jason Smith. Private Smith joined the Territorial Army in 1992, at age 21, and was mobilised for service in Iraq in June 2003. On 26 June 2003, after an acclimatisation spell in Kuwait, he arrived at Camp Abu Naji, his base in Iraq. From there he was moved to an old athletics stadium some 12 kilometres away, where a number of British soldiers were billeted.

Temperatures in Iraq in summer regularly exceed 55 degrees centigrade and on

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll