|
 '
War Veterans Lose Stress Battle
Wednesday, May 21, 2003 British army veterans
today lost a court battle to win compensation for the after effects of trauma
suffered in active service from the Falklands to Northern Ireland, Bosnia and
the 1991 Gulf war.
A high court judge in London ruled against the accusation that
the Ministry of Defence failed to adequately prepare personnel for their
inevitable exposure to the "horrors of war" or provide them with suitable care
afterwards.
Mr Justice Owen found that the MoD could take the benefit of a
statutory immunity that applied up to 1987.
The group action involved nearly 2,000 potential claimants who
had registered an interest, but the hearing centred on 15 "lead" cases which had
been prepared for the trial in order to illustrate the central issues of the
case.
Mr Stephen Irwin QC, representing the claimants, told the judge
at the beginning of the hearing in March last year that they were not suing the
MoD for "exposure to war" but that it should have made resources available to
provide adequate psychiatric care.
The case centred on the MoD's alleged lack of proper care for
its personnel when they were not actually engaged in fighting, patrolling or
peacekeeping, and the effects of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
It was alleged that despite the MoD providing an occupational
health service and primary healthcare for personnel in the three services the
majority of those affected by trauma were discharged without even recognition of
their complaints, let alone treatment.
Sean Rusling, chairman of the National Gulf Veterans and
Families Association, said that while the ruling meant that claimants who served
in the Falklands and Northern Ireland before 1988 no longer had a case those in
the Gulf would still press for compensation.
"I've been advised by our lawyers that the majority of Gulf war
cases will continue," he said.
"There is no need to appeal, because the judge has acknowledged
that treatment was available but the MoD failed to diagnose and treat them."
If the claimants had been successful it could have resulted in a
total damages payout in excess of £100m.
The judge gave his ruling in a 710-page written judgment. In a
synopsis, he said: "It has long been recognised that combat may result in
psychiatric as well as physical casualties. The infliction of shock and extreme
stress on an enemy has been a military objective throughout history.
"War and warlike operations inevitably take their toll, both
physical and psychological."
He said he was "satisfied" that the MoD was in breach of its
duty of care to four of the lead claimants but such cases "turned on their own
facts" and did not demonstrate a systemic failure on the part of the MoD.
Solicitors for the claimants, Manchester-based Linder Myers,
said: "We are very disappointed by these findings. The clear implication is that
the onus was on the individual to make known their own suffering, even where
they were untrained and ignorant of the nature and cause of their problems."
The MoD welcomed the judgment. It said in a statement: "The MoD
acknowledges that some members of the armed forces may, during the period of
their careers, be subject to traumatic experiences and may suffer stress as a
result," it said in a statement.
"But this does not mean that the MoD has been negligent or that
the individual is entitled to receive common law compensation."
Liberal Democrat MP Paul Tyler, a member of the Royal British
Legion Gulf War Group, said that while the ruling was "bitterly disappointing"
it did not mean that all those who have suffered ill-health caused by their
service, have no further hope of proper recognition and compensation.
"For those who came back from the first Gulf war with chronic
illnesses, there are still important questions to answer on the effects of the
drug cocktail administered to them."
The parties are now expected to return to court on July 16 to
discuss issues of costs and a possible appeal.
|
