Senior Associate James Broomhall has provided comment in The Daily Express on the legal issues surrounding crown immunity, and the options open to those seeking to take action against the MOD when safety failures lead to tragic accidents.

Outlining the principle of crown immunity, James explained: “Crown immunity is a legal principle that prevents government departments, including the MOD, from being prosecuted under certain laws unless explicitly stated. Under Section 48 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, the Crown is exempt from criminal liability for breaches of health and safety law.

“The MOD maintains that this immunity is essential for preserving national security and ensuring operational flexibility, but critics argue that it also insulates the department from full accountability when things go wrong.”

James went on to discuss the procedures surrounding accidents deriving from safety failures, commenting: “When a serviceperson dies due to suspected safety failings, families can pursue civil claims for negligence and seek answers through inquests. However, unlike private employers, the MOD cannot be prosecuted for criminal breaches of the Health and Safety at Work Act. That means it faces no criminal fines or court judgments under the Act, even where serious failings are identified.

“In place of prosecutions, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) can issue a Crown Censure – a formal notice indicating that, if the MOD were not protected by immunity, there would have been sufficient grounds for prosecution. A recent example occurred in April 2022, when the MOD accepted a Crown Censure after a soldier was injured during a live-ammunition training exercise, admitting breaches of sections 2(1) and 3(1) of the Act.

“Since 1999, the HSE has issued 44 Crown Censures to various public bodies, including, but not limited to, the MOD, HMRC, and the UK Border Agency.”

James went on to explore the legal steps required for reforming crown immunity, detailing: “Reform is possible, but it would require Parliament to amend Section 48 of the Act. This could be achieved through new legislation or by extending the reach of existing law to include the Crown. While politically sensitive, the idea has gained traction in recent years, including recommendations from parliamentary inquiries such as the 2016 ‘ Beyond endurance? Military exercises and the duty of care inquiry’. With growing public scrutiny and pressure from bereaved families, the legal route to reform is clear, even if the political remains uncertain.”

James’ comments were published in The Daily Express, both online and in print, 30 June 2025.