header-logo header-logo

29 May 2015 / Richard Scorer
Issue: 7654 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

War games

Members of the armed forces should have recourse to the courts, argues Richard Scorer

“None have [sic] succeeded in defeating the armed forces of the UK. Napoleon and Hitler could not. But where these enemies failed, our own legal institutions threaten to succeed.” This was the stark conclusion of The Fog of Law, a report originally published in 2013 by the think tank Policy Exchange. The report asserted that judicial decisions—involving the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) and negligence claims by injured soldiers against the Ministry of Defence—had “undermined the armed forces ability to operate effectively on the battlefield”. The report sparked a fierce debate, and led to last year’s report from the House of Commons Defence Select Committee UK Armed Forces Personnel and the Legal Framework for Future Operations. The Select Committee report reiterated some of the concerns expressed in the Fog of Law. But until now these arguments have had relatively little political traction—not least because one of the parties in the coalition government was firmly committed to upholding

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll