The daughter of a soldier who was killed in a lightly-armoured Snatch Land Rover in Iraq will be allowed to sue the Government for alleged negligence but three other compensation claims were dismissed in the High Court yesterday.
The Ministry of Defence said that it wanted to appeal against the decision by Mr Justice Owen to permit lawyers acting for Courtney Ellis, 10, to push on with their challenge.
In a potentially embarrassing case, the MoD is accused of failing in its duty of care by sending troops to war in Snatch Land Rovers — dubbed “mobile coffins” because of their ineffectiveness against roadside bombs. Private Lee Ellis, 23, was killed in one in southern Iraq in February 2006.
It was only a partial victory for the relatives of three servicemen killed in separate incidents while travelling in Snatch Land Rovers in Iraq between 2005 and 2006.
The judge blocked their attempt to sue the MoD under the Human Rights Act because the deaths occurred outside Britain and off base, so did not fall under the law’s jurisdiction. “The Snatch Land Rover claims based on breach of Article 2 will therefore be struck out,” he ruled.
Advertisement
Susan Smith has been a leading voice in the campaign for justice by the relatives of Snatch Land Rover victims after her son, Private Phillip Hewett, was killed in one of the controversial vehicles in 2005.
The bereaved mother said she was disappointed at the ruling but not surprised. “You seem to take one step forward and four steps back,” she said speaking after the decision was announced. “It is not the end. We will just carry on.”
Colin Redpath, whose lost his son, Lance Corporal Kirk Redpath, 22, in a Snatch Land Rover in 2006, was also upset at the judge’s ruling.
“We’ve got to go on and see what happens. It has been a long process,” he said. “It is just another cog to turn. Hopefully there will be a light at the end of the tunnel.”
MoD lawyers had argued that decisions about battlefield equipment were for politicians and military commanders and asked the High Court to stop compensation claims going forward.
Advertisement
Jocelyn Cockburn, a solicitor at Hodge, Jones & Allen who represented the three families, said that they would seek to appeal against the ruling on jurisdiction.
She argued that servicemen and women should enjoy the same human rights protection when fighting in a war zone as they do when on base or back in Britain.
“What soldiers really need is to know that when they are sent out to fight for their country ... that all reasonable steps have been taken to protect them and that is what this fight is all about,” she told The Times.
While failing for now on the human rights front, Ms Cockburn was very pleased with being able to pursue the negligence claim. “That is a very, very significant victory,” she said.
The MoD had tried to argue the defence of combat immunity but that had not been allowed because the decision to send Private Ellis to Iraq in a Snatch Land Rover had not been taken in the heat of battle.
Advertisement
“We are talking about the failure to equip our troops and those big decisions about equipment and possibly training,” the solicitor added.
Mr Justice Owen said that he would consider whether to allow the respective appeals. If they are given the go-ahead, an appeals hearing should be heard within a year.
As well as the Snatch Land Rover cases, the family of a soldier killed in a “friendly fire” incident in his Challenger Tank in Iraq at the start of the invasion was given permission to continue a separate negligence claim against the MoD.
The family accuse the ministry of having failed to fit tanks with equipment that would help to identify targets and of ensuring that troops were sufficiently trained.
Corporal Stephen Allbutt, 35, died when a fellow Challenger 2 tank fired at his tank.
Advertisement
The judge announced his ruling yesterday after hearing arguments from all sides during a three-day hearing in London in May.