Having commented yesterday that there were two issues running here, now a third pops up, namely compensation by or on behalf those injured or killed .
That is an easier issue to address.
The law in England is as set-out in this useful review, namely ...
LIABILITY FOR AIRCRAFT DAMAGE TO GROUND OCCUPIERS
-A STUDY OF CURRENT TRENDS IN TORT LAW
Tort law may properly be considered as an ever flexible body of
law constantly changing to meet the needs of society. It must be admitted,
however, that legal concepts have not always succeeded in keeping
apace with the development of the activity. A study of the considerations
affecting liability growing out of aircraft damages to persons
and property on the ground seems useful in reflecting the present trends
and bases of tort law generally. Here the law, caught in a state of flux,
can be objectively appraised in an atmosphere unfettered by rigid
precedent.
Historically aviation was considered an ultrahazardous activity.
For this reason aircraft owners were absolutely liable for damage to
persons and property on the ground.' This rule of liability without
fault was adopted in England and many other foreign countries' as well
http://www.repository.law.indiana.ed...71&context=ilj