The Need to Know

John Cahill's next case study is about James who was discharged from the army on medical grounds in June 1997

The Facts

In the early hours of the 11 July 1996 James and other soldiers were drinking in the Sergeants mess at Borden in Hampshire. They had carried on drinking after the mess had officially closed. As the evening wore on events for James became a blur and somehow he ended up outside in an ornamental pond unable to move. He had suffered a C6 complete lesion.

The Difficulties

On the 10th June 1999 I received a letter from James. He told his story and asked whether Stewarts could help. His assumption was that he had been thrown into the ornamental pond. I agreed to undertake investigations to see if a claim against the MOD was warranted. Limitation was due to expire in 30 days as a claim for personal injury must be brought within 3 years from the date of accident or the negligent act complained of. The timescale was very tight indeed. Because James had no further recollection of that evening's events the only source of evidence was the MOD itself. Although the MOD had conducted an inquiry into the accident James had never seen the final report or been told of the outcome. Rules of court permit a claimant to seek information about his accident by a process known as pre-action disclosure. This was the only option open to us to find out the names and addresses of the individuals concerned and to obtain the Board of Inquiry Report. The MOD's policy is to refuse to disclose such information without a court order. On the 7 July 1999 the application was lodged in the High Court with a statement giving our reasons why it was necessary to obtain the information from the MOD . The High Court agreed to an emergency hearing and we duly appeared before the court on the 8 July. The court ordered the MOD to disclose its Board of Inquiry Report within 24 hours. Immediately after the hearing the court order was served on the MOD and by 5.30 p.m. that day we were in possession of the Inquiry Report.

The Outcome

The Report made it clear that no other person could be blamed for the accident. The Board found that as James reached the ornamental pond he had either fallen or dived in and that no one else had been involved. James' C6 lesion was consistent with his having dived into the pond. James was able to accept these conclusions and 3 years from the date of his accident he felt that his “need to know” had been satisfied.