laims Against Allied Servicemen
Page 51
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
To Obtain Redress for Losses or Damage Caused by U.S. Airmen and Others in This Country is Straightforward
• 1952 there was passed the Visiting r'orces Act, which sought to lay down tam n fundamental principles relating the presence in this country, both at t time or at any time in the future, the servicemen of other Commonaith or allied powers. The Act made rly elaborate rules for dealing with st of the legal problems arising from :h a situation, but in respect of civil ims against members of those forces was relatively silent.
iection 9 merely empowered the nister of Defence to make " arrangents " for the settlement of such ims, but it was not until the middle 1954 that any such arrangements re made public, and, judging by the ount of understandable ignorance on part of people whose vehicles have m involved in accidents with some of : large number of United States and nadian servicemen in this country, it uld be of advantage to state the rules 'erning claims.
Right to Sue
r:irst, and most important, nothing in
Act itself or in the procedure ilved under it takes away a victim's ht of suing the individual driver or cmgdoer involved, and whether the ter was on or off duty can make no ference in this respect. The laws of s country arc for the general welfare d safety of the public and if a .eigner comes here he must conform them like everyone else.
the question of whether the service
n was on or off duty is, however, a .y material consideration when one fits to take advantage of the new angements made by the Minister or fence, which take away no existing hts but add a useful channel for purlig claims in such cases.
Scope of Act
iecondly, although when considering iting forces to this country one autotically thinks of the United States Force, the Act itself—and therefore arrangements made under it—apply service forces from Canada, AustraNew Zealand. South Africa, India, kistan, Ceylon, the United States, ince, Belgium. Norway and the therlands. The arrangements will aly to any claim arising out of acts nmitted on or since June 12, 1954. f the wrongful act of the foreign vicemen—whether it be negligent ving (which will obviously be the
■ st usual occurrence) or of some other .m of tort—was committed during course of the man's duty, then the im is dealt with in the same way as had been a claim against a member the British Armed Forces. lf, as a ult of negotiations with the claimant cttlement is agreed, that sum will be ly paid to the claimant through the nister of Defence. If, however, the claimant cannot obtain art offer which he considers adequate to compensate him for his loss, it is open to him to pursue his claim in the ordinary courts against the individual wrongdoer, and whatever he succeeds in recovering there will be paid him through the Minister of Defence.
Clearly, one of the difficulties arising in all claims in respect of accidents will be as to whether the serviceman in question was on duty or not at the time. Accordingly, if a dispute arises on this point the question will be submitted to a legal arbitrator for his decision, which will be binding and conclusive on all concerned.
In the event of it being decided that the driver was not on official duty, no responsibility for settlement of any claim will be accepted by the Minister. but the merits of the claim will still be investigated on his behalf and the visiting force authorities informed of any conclusions he may have reached so that an ex gratia payment may be considered. As already indicated, however, nothing in such circumstances prevents the victim suing the individual wrongdoer direct.
Another obvious difficulty is that of identifying the wrongdoer in the case of a " hit-and-run " accident. The procedure there is for the question of whether the vehicle concerned was being used in the course of dut■. to be determined by the arbitrators.
Obviously, in most cases anyone who feels he has a claim against a member of a visiting force will probably take legal advice at some stage. Where the damages involved are very small, however, there would seem to be no good reason why a claim should not be lodged by the victim himself, so it may be adVantageous to know how this should be lodged.
All claims arising in respect of any visiting service force should be addressed to the Secretary, Claims Commission, War Office, Nuffield House, Piccadilly, London. W.I. The only exception to this is in respect of claims arising out of damage caused by aircraft of the visiting force, when the claim should he directed to the Under Secretary of State, Air Ministry F7(D). Metropole Buildings, Northumberland Avenue, London, W.C.2.
Refusal to Pay Lastly, perhaps, one should consider the position where either a plaintiff has sued an individual foreign serviceman and recovered judgment, or where the latter has. contracted a debt and has refused to pay. The claimant should write to the man's commanding officer setting out the position, and in thlt case of members of the U.S. Air Force, if this brings no satisfaction from the man himself, this should be followed by a letter to the Staff Judge Advocate. Headquarters, Third U.S. Air Force, Victoria Park Estates, South Ruislip. Middlesex, enclosing a copy of judgment or admission as to indebtedness.
Although the authorities concerned have no power to stop a man's pay, in the U.S. forces at least a failure to pay a just debt is an offence in itself and there is no reason to suppose that the authorities—to whom such matters are important from the point of view of their good public relations and prestige —would not press for payment.