ORAC
22nd Jan 2002, 18:50
BBC:
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1775000/1775645.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1775000/1775645.stm</a>
Ruling paves way for MoD claims
. .Members of the armed forces could soon be able to sue the government for death or injury following a High Court ruling. . .Mr Justice Keith has backed the argument that the current immunity from compensation action is incompatible with various rights under the European Convention.
The case was brought by Alan Matthews, a former electrical engineer in the Royal Navy between 1955 and 1968.
All this is an exceptionally, indeed an unacceptably, high price to pay for the advantage of not having to prove fault. . . .Mr Justice Keith . .He claims he developed an asbestos-related illness while at work - although it was not until 1999 that he became aware his illness was due to what he alleges were acts or omissions on the part of the Ministry of Defence.
The judge said that until the end of the Second World War legal proceedings could not be brought against the Crown on the basis that "the King can do no wrong".
That immunity of action was brought to an end in 1947 with the Crown Proceedings Act.
But members of the armed forces were treated exceptionally.
Other cases
If they died or were injured in the course of their duties, the Crown could not be sued if the Secretary of State certified that the death or injury would be treated as attributable to service for the purposes of entitlement to a war pension.
The exception was removed in 1987, but its removal was not retrospective.
This had the result that, even after that date, claims by members of the armed forces, or their families, who had died or been injured while on duty prior to 1987 could not proceed.
The judge said that the outcome of a number of large group actions depended on the success of Mr Matthews's challenge.
The MoD, which was given permission to appeal, argued that the case should be stopped now at a preliminary stage.
But Mr Matthews claimed this infringed his right under the Convention to a fair hearing for his right to damages to be determined.
Judge Keith said Mr Matthews's civil right not to have been exposed to asbestos in circumstances allegedly amounting to negligence or breach of statutory duty was unaffected by the 1947 Act which prevented him from pursuing damages for the breach of that civil right.
Since his claim involved the determination of that civil right, the Convention was engaged.
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1775000/1775645.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1775000/1775645.stm</a>
Ruling paves way for MoD claims
. .Members of the armed forces could soon be able to sue the government for death or injury following a High Court ruling. . .Mr Justice Keith has backed the argument that the current immunity from compensation action is incompatible with various rights under the European Convention.
The case was brought by Alan Matthews, a former electrical engineer in the Royal Navy between 1955 and 1968.
All this is an exceptionally, indeed an unacceptably, high price to pay for the advantage of not having to prove fault. . . .Mr Justice Keith . .He claims he developed an asbestos-related illness while at work - although it was not until 1999 that he became aware his illness was due to what he alleges were acts or omissions on the part of the Ministry of Defence.
The judge said that until the end of the Second World War legal proceedings could not be brought against the Crown on the basis that "the King can do no wrong".
That immunity of action was brought to an end in 1947 with the Crown Proceedings Act.
But members of the armed forces were treated exceptionally.
Other cases
If they died or were injured in the course of their duties, the Crown could not be sued if the Secretary of State certified that the death or injury would be treated as attributable to service for the purposes of entitlement to a war pension.
The exception was removed in 1987, but its removal was not retrospective.
This had the result that, even after that date, claims by members of the armed forces, or their families, who had died or been injured while on duty prior to 1987 could not proceed.
The judge said that the outcome of a number of large group actions depended on the success of Mr Matthews's challenge.
The MoD, which was given permission to appeal, argued that the case should be stopped now at a preliminary stage.
But Mr Matthews claimed this infringed his right under the Convention to a fair hearing for his right to damages to be determined.
Judge Keith said Mr Matthews's civil right not to have been exposed to asbestos in circumstances allegedly amounting to negligence or breach of statutory duty was unaffected by the 1947 Act which prevented him from pursuing damages for the breach of that civil right.
Since his claim involved the determination of that civil right, the Convention was engaged.