Ministry of Defence accepts responsibility for veterans who suffered hearing loss in service in 'groundbreaking' High Court case
The Ministry of Defence has accepted responsibility for the hearing loss suffered by former armed forces personnel in a 'groundbreaking' agreement at the High Court.
At a hearing on Monday, lawyers for the MoD accepted that it had a 'duty of care' towards personnel amid legal claims brought by former members of the armed forces who suffered from hearing loss, having disputed this in earlier legal action.
The agreement applies only to those who have served in regular or reserve armed forces since 1987 but does not apply to civilian military staff or cadets.
While the MoD accepts that noise exposure during service caused hearing loss among former personnel, it may dispute the extent to which this happened in individual cases.
That issue, and others in contention in relation to the claims, are due to be decided at a trial involving several 'test cases', which is expected to be held between October and December 2025.
The Ministry of Defence has accepted responsibility for the hearing loss suffered by former armed forces personnel (pictured: MoD headquarters in London)
The outcome of the trial will likely then affect how much compensation thousands of others could receive. Approving the agreement, Mr Justice Garnham, sitting with Judge Richard Davison, said: 'We are happy to agree that order.
'I would add our congratulations to the parties for the consensus that seems to lie behind it.'
As part of the agreement, the MoD will also no longer fight claims brought by those represented by one legal firm, Hugh James, on the basis that they are being brought to court too late, or the level of noise they were exposed to.
This means that those represented by Hugh James will only need to prove they suffered hearing loss during service, with the amount of compensation received to be determined through a 'matrix', based on when someone left the military.
Claimants may still be able to launch an individual legal challenge if they disagree with what is offered.
Hugh James currently represents around 5,000 ex-servicemen and women, with thousands of others represented by other law firms.
Under the agreement, the MoD reserves the right not to offer compensation in the same terms as those determined by the 'matrix' to those who are not represented by Hugh James.
Simon Ellis, partner and head of the specialist military department at Hugh James, said: 'This is a groundbreaking development for servicemen and women seeking justice for their hearing loss.
The hearing took place at the High Courts of Justice (pictured) in London on Monday
'Many military personnel suffered hearing loss that was entirely preventable, had they been provided with the correct equipment and training.
'As a result, individuals have had their careers prematurely ended, other employment opportunities denied to them, and their personal lives irrevocably changed.
'People who put their lives on the line in the service of our country should expect that they are not put in additional unnecessary danger by their employer.
'The Ministry of Defence has both accepted the duty of care that they owe military personnel to protect their hearing and agreed that all individuals discharged after 1987 can secure the compensation they are entitled to for any hearing loss resulting from their military service.'
The agreement comes after a High Court ruling in March last year, where former Royal Marine James Barry was awarded more than £700,000 in compensation after having to leave the service because of hearing loss.
Mr Barry, 35, joined the Royal Marines in 2013 and began to suffer hearing loss during live-fire training exercises.
He was medically discharged in 2017 because of his hearing loss, which he described as 'life-shattering' and leaving him feeling 'very bitter' towards the MoD.
In a ruling, Mr Justice Johnson said that while hearing protection was available for Mr Barry, it was 'inadequate and incompatible with other equipment'.
Former Royal Marine James Barry, 35, pictured outside London's High Court last year after he was awarded more than £700,000 in compensation after having to leave the service because of hearing loss
He said problems 'were well known' but 'lamentably, it appears that nothing was done by the MoD to address the obvious and serious problem'.
He said: 'At the time, it didn't dawn on me how significant (being medically discharged) was. I have a lot more issues now with anxiety, stress, I feel like a lost boy. It's really, really difficult.'
He continued: 'People think I have won the lottery. The reality of it is I have had to drag my partner and my two young children through probably the most depressed, anxious six years I have ever had in my life.
'I am probably in a worse mental state than I ever had been. It is hard for me to think that I used to be this person who was considered mentally resilient, and the things that I achieved in (the Royal Marines). I am a shadow of that bloke now.'
Mr Barry said the agreement was 'absolutely brilliant' and he hoped that it 'changes the attitude of people', and encouraged those with a 'legitimate claim' to come forward.
A former Royal Marine has said the Ministry of Defence (MoD) accepting responsibility for hearing loss suffered during service gave him a 'glimmer of hope' in his legal fight for compensation.
Robert 'Barney' Barnett was medically discharged from the armed forces in 2014 after an 18-year career, which saw him serve on three tours of Afghanistan and two of Iraq.
The 44-year-old is now one of thousands hoping to receive compensation for noise-induced hearing loss suffered during military service after the MoD accepted that it had a duty of care towards personnel.
Robert 'Barney' Barnett, 44, was medically discharged from the armed forces in 2014 after an 18-year career, which saw him serve on three tours of Afghanistan and two of Iraq
The agreement, approved by the High Court on Monday and which is the first of its kind, could allow thousands of former servicemen and women to claim damages.
Mr Barnett launched legal action against the MoD in 2016, having never been able to afford the hearing aids he needed after suffering around a 20% loss of hearing in each ear.
He said the legal process was 'slow' and 'frustrating', having rejected low settlement offers in the past, with those affected by hearing loss 'treading water'.
He said: 'It gives me a glimmer of hope. Not just me, I hope nobody has to go through what I have. It's speeding up the process.
'The people who don't have a good support network, this injection of cash, whatever that will be, whatever level, for some people that will mean the world, to not have to go through this lengthy legal battle.'
He continued: 'The reason I am doing this is to spread the message far and wide. We found in the veteran community and the services, sometimes things are kept need-to-know, so the hope of doing this is that the message is spread far and wide, and there is hope.
'If you don't ask, you don't get, so it is worth at least ringing, texting, or sending an email just to make an initial inquiry.'
Mr Barnett, from Christchurch in Dorset, joined the Marines aged 16, following in the footsteps of his father, who served in the Royal Navy for 40 years.
He was exposed to various weapons and mortar fire and first noticed hearing problems in 2008.
Mr Barnett said that service-issue hearing defenders 'wouldn't fit under your helmet, let alone with the earpiece for your radio'.
He said: 'All we cared about were the people left and right of us. In the heat of battle, you don't really think about your hearing defenders.'
Mr Barnett is one of thousands hoping to receive compensation for noise-induced hearing loss suffered during military service after the MoD accepted that it had a duty of care towards personnel
He continues to suffer from tinnitus in his job in security, having been denied the opportunity to pursue a planned career in the police after leaving the military.
He said: 'Every single day it affects me. It wakes me up, it is a constant buzzing in my ear. I don't like to be in places like nightclubs, even offices, on the trains.
'The moment let's say three of four people came into the room, or are speaking, let's say for instance they had alcohol, then the noise level rises and I find it extremely difficult.'
Mr Barnett said that those who were medically discharged were given three months to 'get your life in order', and that he knew 'some' people who had taken their own lives after being medically discharged due to hearing problems.
The father-of-one said the process was 'absolutely heartbreaking' and the adjustment to civilian life was 'brutal'.
He said: 'It was extremely difficult because the jobs I could have gone into were limited.
'My first choice would have been RMR (Royal Marines Reserves) as a backup, I would have applied for the police, and having been limited in where you can go, it does start to affect you after a while, because not only have you lost your identity from the service, you are also limited as to where you can go.'
He continued: 'It is hard. It is a hard transition, and it is extremely turbulent post being medically discharged as opposed to discharged.
'When you leave, it's your choice, and you have around 12 to 24 months to plan your exit and attend courses, but when you only have three months to get your life in order ... it's a very lonely place sometimes.'
On Monday, lawyers for the MoD accepted that the organisation had a duty of care towards personnel who were suing the body, having previously disputed this in earlier legal claims.
There are thousands of active cases, with the agreement applying to those who have been in regular or reserve armed forces since 1987 and does not apply to civilian military staff or cadets.
While the MoD accepts that noise exposure during service caused hearing loss among former personnel, it may dispute the extent to which this happened in individual cases.
This issue, and others in contention in relation to the hearing-loss claims, are due to be decided at a trial involving several 'test cases', which is expected to be held between October and December 2025.
The outcome of the trial will likely then affect how much compensation thousands of others could receive.
When asked about his feelings towards the MoD, Mr Barnett said: 'I don't have anger against them, but there is more, dare I say it, frustration.
'But again, by going through this process, we make it easier for those behind us, and that is what it is all about.'
