§ Mr. AshleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will outline the procedure that was followed regarding the complaint of ex-Marine Martin Kettrick for redress of grievance; who assessed the complaint; and how the opinion of Martin Kettrick was presented.
§ Mr. FreemanAs an ex-member of the Royal Marines, Mr. Kettrick submitted his complaint directly through the Department of the Commandant General Royal Marines. In accordance with normal practice, information concerning the complaint, its origins, and all relevant circumstances was assembled by the relevent secretariat division for presentation to the Admiralty Board. The opinion of Mr. Kettrick, as expressed in the full text of his complaint, formed part of that presentation. The case was considered at length by the Admiralty Board and a decision then taken on behalf of the Defence Council.
§ Mr. AshleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether, in the consideration of the case of ex-Marine Martin Kettrick, the fact that section 10 of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 has now been abolished was taken into account; what assessment was made of the actuarial level of the pensions that Martin Kettrick received from62W the Army in relation to what he might have received had he been successful in a civil court; and if there was any assessment of the possibility that Martin Kettrick's injuries arose from the negligence of others.
§ Mr. FreemanThe Crown Proceedings (Armed Forces) Act 1987 is non-retrospective and section 10 of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 remains a bar in Mr. Kettrick's case to a civil action in the courts in which questions of negligence and level of damages would otherwise have been determined. Nevertheless, in considering Mr. Kettrick's case full account was taken, and assessments made, of these and all other relevant factors including the value of the pension and other benefits which he continues to receive under the no-fault system available to members of the armed forces.