header-logo header-logo

No justice for veterans

16 October 2019
Issue: 7860 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury , Damages
printer mail-detail
Personal injury lawyers have reacted furiously to plans to block veterans from compensation claims.

The government proposes to restrict claims against armed forces veterans by ending judicial discretion to override the three-year limitation period and introducing a no-fault compensation scheme to stop claims from going to court. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) consultation, ‘Legal protections for armed forces personnel and veterans serving in operations outside the UK’, which sets out the proposals, emphasises the stress on veterans and their families where lengthy claims relating to overseas conflicts are brought by civilians, which it dubs ‘lawfare’. The consultation closed last week.

However, lawyers point out that the proposed legislation would also prevent injured armed forces personnel and veterans from seeking compensation from the MoD in the courts.  

Gordon Dalyell, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, said: ‘The MoD’s message is clear.

‘Injured veterans are a burden it wants to shake off as quickly as possible. These are not injuries sustained in battle. They are needless injuries which could and should be avoided and there are many valid reasons why an injured person might wait ten years before seeking compensation.

‘The true damage of post-traumatic stress disorder, or asbestos exposure, for example, can take years to manifest. There is no justification for why the MoD should be excused from its responsibilities to suffering veterans. The employers of civilians are held to account, it would be perverse for our veterans and serving personnel to be denied the same access to justice.’

The MoD consultation also proposed a commitment to derogate from the European Convention on Human Rights before future conflicts. 

Issue: 7860 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury , Damages
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

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