The US military pays up... finally

After years of denying the incident ever took place, the US Army has agreed to compensate three British military policemen and their interpreter to the cumulative tune of $650,000 US.

The Pentagon has agreed to pay more than £300,000 in compensation to British soldiers who were seriously injured when their vehicle was in a collision with a US tank convoy on an Iraqi road. The landmark decision is the first time that the US military has offered money to British troops injured by US forces after admitting liability.

In the civilian world this would cause no more than a shoulder shrug. However, for a military, particularly in a combat, engaging an ally in a legal suit is virtually unheard of. Things like blue-on-blue engagements and road accidents get written off to the "fog of war". This is a first.

Corporal Jane McLauchlan, Staff Sergeant James Rogerson, Corporal Stephen Smith and their interpreter, Khalid Allahou, have been told they will receive collective compensation of £320,000 from the US authorities after the accident more than four years ago. Initially, the American military denied it had any record of the incident. Later it emerged that the collision had been officially recorded at the time. Lawyers for the British troops have accused the US authorities of attempting to 'dump' their inquiry in a move to block the compensation claim, the first private action involving coalition allies in Iraq.

Michael Doyle, a personal injury lawyer for Houston-based firm Doyle Raizner which took the case against the Pentagon, said the claimants were relieved their ordeal was over. 'They only ever wanted the US to admit fault. After years of denying such an incident even occurred, they have now admitted liability for what happened. As far as we can tell, this is the first and only time the US has paid out to British troops.'

The incident was a collision between a US armoured column and a single British military police Land Rover. A US Army tank transporter hit the Land Rover from behind, twice, before running it off the road. Three of the four in the Land Rover at the time are still suffering from injuries which included skull fractures, brain damage, organ damage, spinal fractures and numerous broken bones. Only one of the four was ever returned to duty.

Personally, I don't think the compensation was at all adequate, however at least something is being done in their favour.

Now, the question remains, does this mean that British and Canadian troops who have been bombed and shot up by US forces have a claim against the US government?

You're not going to like this answer. NO.

US forces, in fact most western countries, claim combat immunity in such cases. Even if a clear "right and wrong" can be established, any incident involving combat action is legally unassailable.

So, while this is a new angle on dealing with compensation of allied forces, the focus is more on the fact that it occurred more as a road accident than as an error resulting from combat.

There is little likelihood that the US military would be inclined to even entertain the idea of addressing compensation for incidents like the US air attack on Canadian troops in April 2002 or again in September 2006, despite the fact that negligence on the part of the US pilots was clearly established.

Michael Doyle, the American personal injury lawyer who took the case of the British military police in an action against the US Army, pointed out that because of the nature of the incident he was able to avoid the claim of combat immunity.

... he had secured the £320,000 payout by using the US Foreign Claims Act, which provides compensation for death or injuries caused by non-combat activities of US military personnel.

That makes this lawyer pretty swept up. That particular act is normally applied when a member of the local population is injured or is seeking a remedy for the actions of US military personnel located in overseas bases. An example would be a tank on the German autobahn hitting a civilian vehicle. It's never been successfully applied to an incident between allied combatant forces "in theatre".

Hat tip to reader Southern Quebec