Description
Claimant Failed to Establish that Employer Should Have Provided Armoured Vehicle in Iraq:Christopher Clarke J. held that the Claimant, a civilian contractor working in Basra, had failed to establish that the level of risk from improvised explosive devices was such that his employer or the Army should only have allowed him to travel in an armoured vehicle. Although the Defendant had not carried out a risk assessment, it did satisfy the Court that it had kept the security situation under review. The absence of a risk assessment would only have been a causative factor if it could have been established that the risk assessment would have stated that all employees must travel in armoured vehicles, which was not the case on the evidence. It was also held that section 1 of the Compensation Act 2006 applied to the claim, since the steps that the Claimant was suggesting should have been undertaken would have prevented the desirable activity of reconstructing the infrastructure of Iraq.
