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

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll